OLYMPIA — Voters were favoring a referendum that would give Washington consumers a bigger weapon against insurance companies in court, but the measure’s opponents were hoping for a comeback.
Referendum 67 was winning in unofficial returns Tuesday night. About a third of the expected vote had been counted.
Opponents were not ready to give up Tuesday night, hoping that additional tallies from politically conservative Eastern Washington could help close the gap in the coming days’ vote counts.
“We’ve got a long ways to go, I think,” Reject R-67 spokeswoman Dana Childers said.
Referendum supporters were heartened by the first night’s trends, but also said the final verdict would come in the next few days.
“We’re definitely thrilled to see an early lead in a lot of outlying counties. It’s the best we could have hoped for,” Approve R-67 spokeswoman Sue Evans said.
“It’s not over ‘til it’s over,” she added.
If approved, R-67 would allow policy holders to collect triple damages if their insurer unreasonably denies a claim or violates unfair practice rules.
The law would not apply to health coverage, and it wouldn’t allow consumers to sue someone else’s insurance provider for triple damages.
Supporters said R-67 would give consumers a powerful tool to punish bad actors in the insurance industry. Opponents countered that it’s an unnecessary magnet for unfounded lawsuits and would drive up insurance rates.
The nearly $14.5 million in campaign spending by both sides has made R-67 the second-most-expensive ballot measure in state history.
As of last month, it trailed the nearly $16 million in combined spending by supporters and opponents of a 2005 medical malpractice initiative.
Trial lawyers, who also were involved in the malpractice battle, have been the heaviest donors supporting the referendum.
Insurers were the primary donors to the “no” effort. At more than $11 million, their opposition campaign ranks as the most ever spent to defeat a Washington ballot measure.
Democratic state Insurance Commissioner Mike Kreidler appeared in TV ads supporting it.
He was countered by insurance agents, who sent letters directly to their customers warning of higher rates if the measure was approved.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
