I can't believe the Bush Administration is siding with a large industry. ______________ Bush, insurance industry want halt to Holocaust survivors' law Associated Press WASHINGTON -- The Bush administration and the insurance industry told the Supreme Court on Wednesday that a California law to help Holocaust survivors with decades-old insurance claims intrudes on U.S. foreign policy and should be struck down. "What we have here is one state of the union trying to establish its own foreign policy," Deputy Solicitor General Edwin Kneedler said. The high court heard the argument in a lawsuit over a 1999 state law that requires companies that sold policies in Europe from 1920 to 1945, and that are affiliated with California insurance companies, to search their records for details of the policies. Companies that refuse to divulge information could lose their state licenses. The law was intended to address "a despicable practice by insurance companies, their refusal to provide basic policy information" to Holocaust survivors and their heirs, said Frank Kaplan, a Santa Monica, Calif., lawyer who is representing state Insurance Commissioner John Garamendi in the case. Other state insurance commissioners, 52 members of Congress and a law firm with hundreds of Holocaust survivors as clients sided with California. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco upheld the law, overturning a federal district court ruling. A federal appeals court in Atlanta struck down a similar Florida measure.
If it's truly an issue of Federal versus State's rights, it seems they would have to take some action. Then again, if it's a grey area of law, they shouldn't have pursued it.
It's a state thing, but the Fed govt. should be backing that state, and not the Insurance companies on this one. I can't believe they would try and block payments to these survivors. Hell, the U.S. should be helping the State of Ca. as much as possible on this one.
I thought so too. This is really making me angry. Here's an exerpt that shows some people in the federal govt. disagree and are willing to side with the side of the right. http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/spages/286520.html Other state insurance commissioners, 52 members of Congress and a public interest law firm with hundreds of Holocaust survivors as clients sided with California.
Great, All we need is California's ahem cough *bankrupt* cough policies to continue. This is just another example of California being the birthplace of another goldmine for the legal industry. Keep suing someone or attacking a company because of 'affiliated' companies. What Barbara Boxer and Grey Davis need to do is learn some basic economics and not screw up their state then blame it on 'corporations'. Anyone, corporate or otherwise will take advantage of you if you let them. That is basic capitalism. It seems California is the constant birthplace of those who don't wish to work for what they have, but wish to find some glimmer of hope to screw someone else. Aside from the California Rant, how fair is it to just allow this to go to Holocaust survivors between 1920 and 1945. There were many other groups all over the world that this may apply to, then we'd be opening a can of worms.
If its the right thing to do... then why not open the can of worms? The people who experienced the holocaust have payed enough in pain and anguish to deserve what is rightfully theirs.
Sadly I don't think this is a legal goldmine. After all there aren't endless amounts of Holocaust survivors, and their numbers are shrinking. I think it shouldn't be a problem for them and their families to be paid what they are owed.
To sound heartless. We've paid billions of taxpayer dollars to support Israel over the years, holocaust survivors can get ****ed. It's not like they're the only ones who suffered through atrocity since WWII. To sound republican. If my insurance rates go up because of these whiners then I'll be pissed.
Let's assume you had life insurance with a company... somebody comes and rousts you out of your bed, carries you off to a camp and kills you. Your insurance company, after almost sixty years, has made no attempt to pay your policy to your heirs or even inform them that there is a policy. They took your money and then did nothing. I hardly see how this fits as golddigging or whining. And the argument about states starting their own foreign policy is bunk. If states have the right to regulate a company that operates within that state, they have a right to correct wrongs done by that company, especially where their citizens are concerned.
Aren't conservatives/republicans for giving the states more power? You were probably being sarcastic but... HeHEHEHE. How can anyone think that after the Supremes gave Bush the election? They play the states rights card, or the strict constructionist, cards when and if it fits their conservative goals.
Nice post. They should pay 100% of what they owe plus interest. I wonder how many actually tried in good faith to pay these policies but couldn't find any survivors? glynch.... You are nuts man.
And what do holocaust survivors in California have to do with Israelis? As good ole refman would say.. point irrelevant. Thats like saying we don't need to send aid to muslims in one country just because we give to another. Rimrocker's post pretty much sums it up.
My problem is that the word AFFILIATED gets thrown into the mix so a company with a minor relationship can be afflicted by the legal groups. If it is a DIRECT insurance policy then that is a different story. One word 'affiliated' means a lot. My second point: Why should this be limited to Holocaust Victims between 1920 and 1945 and not the heirs of families from WWI or US Troops abroad in WWII. What about from foreigners that bought policies from companies that were killed and never paid should they be able to go after 'affiliated' companies. If a company wrote a policy, it should pay. But just like when the holocaust survivors were going after other companies because they bought parts from companies that used slave camp labor, you can always find an affiliate that has little to do with the situation and then sue them.
Well everyone who deserved to be paid should, but I haven't seen anything saying that families of other people from WWII haven't been paid. They may well have been paid, and so it's a non-issue. If anyone hasn't been paid that deserves to of course they should be paid.
