In defending their opposition to SB 6385, the Homeowner’s Bill of Rights, several Democratic representatives have been responding to constituents with BIAW talking points, but by far the most transparently silly is this line of defense, which has been put forward in one form or another by multiple legislators:
A law passed by the legislature years ago to protect condominium owners had an unintended consequence of creating an “insurance crisis.” Because insurance for building condominiums was not available, the town center of Mercer Island has 400 plus apartments!
During the last five years, the legislature, through passage of “Cure,” “Affirmative Defense” and “Condominium Act” reform, began the process of bringing back predictability to the contractor insurance market that had been damaged from earlier Legislation. This was in response to the lack of insurance available to builders–especially condo builders.
SB 6385 would undo all that has been gained and would force medium and small contractors out of business because they would not be able to obtain third-party warranties and general liability insurance. At the very least, the cost of housing would dramatically increase for all new homebuyers.
Forget for a moment that this “insurance crisis” was created by damage claims arising from crappy construction, and that if builders and insurers had wanted to avert this crisis they could have implemented a construction inspection program instead of waiting for the Legislature to mandate one. And disregard the fact that SB 6385 merely gives single family homebuyers the same protections currently granted condo buyers today, including those reforms of the last five years, so the bill doesn’t actually “undo” anything.
Forget all that. Let’s just assume for the sake of argument that the statements above are irrefutable fact, and if so… wouldn’t that imply that Speaker Frank Chopp and the other conscientious defenders of affordable housing should be working their asses off to repeal the condo warranties? Don’t condo developers deserve the same immunity from lawsuits currently enjoyed by developers of single family homes? Isn’t anybody going to protect our state’s vulnerable builders from the predatory practices of their own customers? Mercer Island already has (gasp) “400 plus apartments” for God’s sake… when will this savagery end?
You see where I’m going.
Unlike others, I don’t entirely blame the Eastside Democrats who are doing the BIAW’s dirty work; they either believe the talking points they spew, or they’ve made the shrewd political calculation that this is what they need to do to hold office in their swing districts. (Or, perhaps, some combination of the two.) But the Dems don’t need their votes to pass this bill in the House, so in the end, it all comes down to Speaker Chopp. So what is it Frank…? Who deserves your protection more, homebuyers or condo builders? Because if you’re gonna stand by and quietly watch your members repeat BIAW bullshit like this, you are laying the groundwork for the latter.
“The media serve the interests of state and corporate power, which are closely interlinked, framing their reporting and analysis in a manner supportive of established privilege and limiting debate and discussion accordingly.”
Noam Chomsky
If Frank won’t play – it is time to start putting the pressure on him.
also – Goldy – I disagree on Obama and Clinton. while they have similar postions – there are some major differences in their records on the war (Voted for the war and ued cheney talking points about al qaeda in Iraq), on NAFTA (for it for over 8 years bbefore she was suddenly against it in the primary), on FISA immunity (Clinton skipped the key amendment vote) and on cluster bombs (Clinton for). Clinton has the more compromised record and will have trouble hammering McCain on the war and on corruption.
both would be much better than McCAin – who doesn’t have the temperment, the consistency or the credibilty to be a real President. McCain will continue to forgoe his ideals to pander to the right wing on :
the supreme court
the war in Iraq
Not going after bin Laden
torture – notice he voted against the anti-torture bill
his lobbyist centered campaign
the favors he did for lobbyist before the FCC
repudiating his own campaign finance law
Illegal spying on americans
Insurance guys are supposedly in the business of insuring the public against risks, but what we’ve seen in recent years is a risk-averse insurance industry that only wants to bet on sure things. Keeping 40% of the premium money for themselves, while paying out only 60% in claims, isn’t enough for them; they want to keep it all, and pay nothing. Why buy insurance at all if it doesn’t insure anything?
And why do people who bemoan the unwillingness of insurers to assume risk always solve this “problem” by making consumers bear more risk?
Take the Price-Anderson Act, for example. Nuclear industry shills tell us this law is necessary because nuclear plants won’t be built if the companies that own them can’t get insurance, and nuclear plants can’t get insurance unless their liability is capped. So, P-A capped it at $500 million, and the surrounding community has to eat any and all damages above that amount.
I say the answer to that is, if the surrounding community has to bear the financial risk of a nuclear accident because the insurance industry refuses to assume that risk (in return for premium payments by plant operators), then nuclear plants shouldn’t be built. Period.
If builders won’t put up condos because they can’t get insurers to assume the financial risk of shoddy construction, then they should either improve their building practices or stop building condos.
Would you spend your life savings on a condo that isn’t insurable for quality? I sure as hell wouldn’t. Given the direction things are going in Washington, Texas, and the rest of the country there shouldn’t be any market for new residential construction at all. If builders need legislation shielding them from legal liability before they can build anything, then I don’t want what they’re selling.
No thanks RR, I’ll happily keep my rights as a condo owner. Screw U!