Print

Email story

Comment

Email editor

If you can't take the risk, get out of the market

If you can't take the risk, get out of the market

The Declaration of Independence does not read, "Life, Liberty and Happiness." It certainly doesn't enumerate our rights as, "Life, Liberty and Property Insurance."

If homeowners in Florida can't afford to accept the risk inherent in owning property in a hurricane prone area, they should not expect the general public - including me - to finance their risk. Snow-birds, investors and speculators in the Florida housing market certainly shouldn't expect that the average person in Florida is going to finance their investment for them via increased taxes.

Yes, insurance rates have skyrocketed. This is mostly because they have been kept artificially low for decades, both through the risks not being well-known and through the actions of the state. But the risks are what they are. The decision to own property includes accepting the risks of owning property - or the cost of buying insurance to mitigate those risks.

To quote an old saying, "If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen." If you can't accept the risk, don't buy property in Florida. Don't expect me to finance your decision about where to live.

Debra Blatnik, St. Petersburg

A history lesson on the payday loan bill

McCollum distorts payday loan issue Oct. 13

As Ronald Reagan famously said, "Facts are stubborn things." In 1999, Sen. Walter "Skip" Campbell authored a bill that would have increased the amount a payday loan maker could charge from 10 to 15 percent a week, or the equivalent of 390 a year.

The following is an excerpt about Campbell's infamous 1999 payday loan bill from the Miami Herald: "These are interest rates that, if you charged them to a friend, you could be arrested for racketeering," Mark Ferrulo of the Florida Public Interest Research Group, a consumer watchdog group, said of the Campbell proposal. "This legislation would trap people into a treadmill of debt."

Fortunately, Sen. Campbell's 1999 bill died in committee, and the excellent 2001 bill written and sponsored by Sen. Lee Constantine, R-Altamonte Springs, which became law did not contain Sen. Campbell's outrageous proposal to dramatically increase the amount of interest that payday loan makers could charge.

Sen. Constantine's 2001 bill appropriately regulated the payday loan industry, and I have never criticized that bill. But the fact that Sen. Campbell was one of many co-sponsors of that bill does not relieve him of responsibility for his 1999 proposal to raise the fee charged that would have dearly cost the least fortunate consumers in our state.

Your newspaper's article (Payday loan law is made an issue in Cabinet race, Oct. 11) on this subject and your editorial completely omitted any mention of Sen. Campbell's 1999 bill, the rate increase he proposed, the widely reported public outrage at the time to his proposal, or the fact that the very good 2001 bill was authored not by Sen. Campbell, but by Sen. Constantine, and Campbell had little to do with it other than associating his name as one of many co-sponsors. By failing to do so, you have misled your readers into believing that Sen. Campbell was a champion of consumers on the payday loan issue when in fact he was a tool of the industry trying to raise payday loan rates which fortunately he failed to do.

Bill McCollum, candidate for attorney general, Winter Park

Incensed about high insurance premiums

I thought past homeowners insurance premium increases were high but reeled when I opened my recent one, which has increased over 120 percent and I have had no claims.

I called my agent and was told that each policyholder is being assessed $300 to make up for the Citizens' deficit whether they were insured with that company or not. Are we to be assessed to cover GM's deficit too?

Part of this year's increase is to build a pool for future hurricane damage, and my company did not know when this pool would be sufficiently funded!

I thought my past premiums, since 1970, without claims against it, were for that purpose.

It seems to make no difference whether one chooses to live in a high, well-drained area or in a hazardous one.

We were sold out by the Florida Insurance Commission when insurance companies were allowed to limit their liability to Florida and did not have to debit their losses against billion-dollar profits.

No candidate to date has addressed these issues. I don't intend to vote for anyone who doesn't have a plan to reduce insurance premiums.

Annice Price, Seminole

Subjective restrictions

Priest loses bid to keep Celtic cross in front yard Oct. 14

Did the Westchase community go too far by enforcing their archaic deed restrictions once again? These restrictions are subjective and sometimes unfair. I understand their desire to preserve the value of their homes, but in actuality they are earning a horrible reputation which could cause just the opposite to occur.

Not only was Father Jeff Johnston's Celtic cross tasteful, it did not "stand out," nor was it offensive. It is actually a lovely piece of decoration.

Nicole Weaver, Tampa

Flouting the rules

Priest loses bid to keep Celtic cross in front yard Oct. 14

If people agree to the deed restrictions when they buy a home, why do they then decide to flout the rules? They seem to choose patriotic and religious items, figuring those will gain them the most sympathy as they challenge and attempt to subvert the rules they earlier agreed to.

Tom Miller, Clearwater

More commercialism

Chihuly project to be museum Oct. 12

A single Dale Chihuly glass rendering is art. The next 50 are like signed collectors items, but after that we are describing plain old glassware. Since this has the aroma of commercialism, perhaps Wal-Mart would be interested. Leave the new arts center to the everyday folks of St. Petersburg!

Philip A. Bellefleur, St. Petersburg

[Last modified October 17, 2006, 08:11:52]