Who is Referendum 67 sticking it to? It’s a question everyone should ask before they ink “yes” or “no” on their ballots. Those backing the measure say insurance companies take, take, take and when asked to give, turn up their noses at deserving claimants. But how much of that is based in fact, and how much are the attorneys who landed this one on the ballot playing the old smoke and mirrors game?

Many seem to lump all attorneys in with lepers as far as who they’d least like to be stranded on a deserted island with, and while there are more than a few good ones out there, Ref. 67 seems to cater to those who are indeed out to make a quick buck.

It’ll force out of court settlements in cases, giving a few more money than their original claim but less than three times the amount promised under Ref. 67.

Will it stick it to those deep pocketed insurance companies? The less reputable ones perhaps, but in the end, Ref. 67 sticks it to everyone while lining the pockets of a few attorneys and individuals. That said, some folks truly are getting the runaround from their insurers — but that’s between them and their provider. And that’s where it should be.

The referendum also supports what has already become an all too litigious society in that it pretty much encourages those who are denied money on their claims to go after insurance providers. With the promise of $1,000 becoming $3,000 in the event of a win against said provider, it’s not difficult to envision such cases — frivolous and otherwise — increasing dramatically.

So will the premiums insurance companies charge us all as they are forced to hire a small army of employees to handle the rising number of claim challenges. This one will also tie up the courts, bogging down an already bogged down system even further.

Would the referendum keep further tabs on how insurance companies handle claims? Undoubtedly, but not without costing everyone with insurance a boatload of cash in the process. Vote “no.”