California Proposition 44, Chiropractic License Revocation for Insurance Fraud Measure (March 2002)
| California Proposition 43 | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Election date March 5, 2002 | |
| Topic Elections and campaigns | |
Status Approved | |
| Type State statute | Origin State legislature |
California Proposition 44 was on the ballot as a legislatively referred state statute in California on March 5, 2002. It was approved.
A "yes" vote supported revoking chiropractic licenses for 10 years if a chiropractor is convicted a second time or on multiple counts in one case of insurance fraud, among other offenses. |
A "no" vote opposed revoking chiropractic licenses for 10 years if a chiropractor is convicted a second time or on multiple counts in one case of insurance fraud, thereby continuing to allow the Board of Chiropractic Examiners to provide for punishments for offenses. |
Election results
|
California Proposition 44 |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Result | Votes | Percentage | ||
|
|
3,758,718 | 79.78% | ||
| No | 952,790 | 20.22% | ||
Measure design
Proposition 44 required the Board of Chiropractic Examiners to revoke for ten years the license of a chiropractor who is convicted for a second time (or is convicted of multiple counts in a single case) of various specified offenses, including insurance fraud. After the ten-year period, the chiropractor may apply to the board to reinstate his or her license. Until Proposition 44 was approved, the Board of Chiropractic Examiners had discretion over which punishment to assess for the specific offenses mentioned in Proposition 44.
This measure required voter approval under Proposition 16 of 1922, which amended the California Constitution to require that any change in the law regulating chiropractors has to be approved by a vote of the people.[1]
Text of measure
Ballot title
The ballot title for Proposition 44 was as follows:
| “ | Chiropractors. Unprofessional Conduct. Legislative Initiative Amendment. | ” |
Ballot summary
The ballot summary for this measure was:
| “ |
| ” |
Full Text
The full text of this measure is available here.
Fiscal impact
- See also: Fiscal impact statement
The fiscal estimate provided by the California Legislative Analyst's Office said:
- Negligible additional state costs to implement the measure's provisions.
- Potential state savings, of an unknown amount, in lower workers' compensation and Medi-Cal costs.
Support
Supporters
- State senator Jackie Speier[2]
- California District Attorneys Association President Gordon Spencer[2]
Arguments
Official arguments
The following supporting arguments were presented in the official voter guide for Proposition 43:[2]
| “ | You should vote “yes” on Proposition 44 because insurance
fraud is a crime against all of us. This proposition requires that the license of a chiropractor be suspended for 10 years if the chiropractor is convicted a second time of insurance fraud or related activities or if the chiropractor is convicted a first time of multiple counts of insurance fraud or related activities. It also requires the Chiropractic Board to investigate chiropractors alleged to have committed insurance fraud, if the district attorney does not object to the investigation. A district attorney would not object unless a Board investigation interfered with a criminal investigation. This initiative was placed on the ballot through a unanimous vote of the State Senate and an overwhelming, bipartisan vote of 63–13 in the State Assembly. Its provisions were the outgrowth of testimony from numerous witnesses, including one hooded witness, who appeared before the State Senate Insurance Committee in November 1999, and subsequent hearings in the Legislature. Testimony centered on the way in which insurance fraud is committed, how it can finance other types of criminal activity, and on the costs of fraud to all of us. The reform package created new penalties for chiropractors, doctors and attorneys. The provisions related to doctors and attorneys have already become law. However, amendments to the Chiropractic Act are required to be approved by the voters before becoming law, and this is why the Legislature placed this proposition on the ballot Estimates of the annual cost of insurance fraud vary, but when fraud in workers’ compensation, Medi-Cal, auto, home, health and life insurance are considered, the costs to us all could easily exceed hundreds of millions, and perhaps several billions of dollars annually. High auto insurance costs, higher taxes, and unaffordable health insurance or workers’ compensation insurance are just a few of many reasons that insurance fraud is bad for us all. Obviously, the costs of fraud noted above are not, by any means, solely due to chiropractors. In fact, most chiropractors operate lawfully and provide valuable care to their patients. Some do not. If you are concerned about the quality of chiropractic care and the cost of all types of insurance that covers chiropractic care, vote “yes” on Proposition 44. It is a small part of the larger reform measure that already changed the penalties for insurance fraud committed by other professionals. Voting “yes” on this proposition means voting “no” on chiropractic insurance fraud, and voting “yes” for all of us who need affordable insurance and quality chiropractic care.[3] |
” |
Opposition
Opponents
- Insurance claims investigator Ted Brown[2]
- Insurance consultant/actuary Dale F. Ogden[2]
- Libertarian Party of Mendocino County Chairman Ed Kuwatch[2]
Arguments
Official arguments
The following opposing arguments were presented in the official voter guide for Proposition 43:[2]
| “ | Insurance fraud is a growing crime that raises our insurance
premiums and causes insurance companies to be suspicious of legitimate claims. However, the punishment must fit the crime. A chiropractor who defrauds insurance companies should have to pay restitution and punitive damages. Proposition 44 wants to take a chiropractor’s license away for 10 years. We disagree. Financial dishonesty has nothing to do with medical skill. The only good reason to stop someone from being a chiropractor is if patients have been harmed by incompetent treatment. A person has the right to earn a living, and a trained professional can earn a very good living—enough to pay back any of his fraud victims. We also disagree that the use of “runners” and “cappers” (ambulance chasers) to obtain patients should be considered unprofessional conduct—though it is distasteful. Not that long ago, doctors and lawyers weren’t even permitted to advertise their services. We believe that any business or profession has the right to solicit business without force or fraud. This provides more choices to consumers. California’s state government licenses far too many professions—from barbers to funeral directors to guide dog trainers. It should be up to fully-informed consumers to decide whose goods and services to use—without interference from state bureaucrats. Let’s not add more burdens on a chiropractor’s right to earn a living or peoples’ right to choose their own chiropractor. Vote NO on Proposition 44.[3] |
” |
Path to the ballot
Proposition 44 was referred to the ballot by the California State Legislature via Senate Bill 1988 of the 1999–2000 Regular Session (Chapter 867, Statutes of 2000). It was required to go on the ballot because it amended an initiative approved by voters.[2]
| Votes in legislature to refer to ballot | ||
|---|---|---|
| Chamber | Ayes | Noes |
| Assembly | 63 | 13 |
| Senate | 40 | 0 |
See also
External links
Footnotes
- ↑ San Diego Union-Tribune, "Proposition 44, on chiropractors, has strange twist," February 11, 2002
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 University of California Hastings, "March 2002 Voter Guide," accessed September 23, 2021
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
