When Enough is Not Enough:Correcting Market Inefficiencies in the Purchase and Sale of Residential Property Insurance An Article by Prof. Kenneth S. Klein
Each year at least hundreds, and often thousands of Americans lose their homes to natural disasters striking populated areas. Tens of thousands lose their homes to single-instance fires, floods, or other catastrophes. The majority of these homeowners are underinsured, meaning they have less insurance than it will cost to rebuild their homes. This Article analyzes whether such underinsurance indicates correctible inefficiencies in the residential property insurance markets. The Article identifies two inefficiencies: (1) Inadequate information, which impairs informed pricing decisions by purchasers; and (2) Dispute costs (such as litigation) in the instances of loss exceeding coverage. The Article proposes addressing these inefficiencies by adopting a mandatory disclosure, provided at the time of purchase or renewal of insurance based on the EnergyGuide program labeling appliances for energy consumption, and in turn then barring litigation on adequacy of coverage.
Download PDF
Citizens United As Neoliberal Jurisprudence:The Resurgance of Economic Theory An Article by Prof. Timothy K. Kuhner
On January 21, 2010, the Roberts Court freed corporations to spend unlimited general treasury funds on political advertisements, including those that mention candidates by name and those that are run in the weeks before an election. Shown by recent polls to be one of the most unpopular cases in U.S. history, Citizens United v. FEC promises to set the tone for the Roberts Court's treatment of money-in-politics cases. This article shows that Citizens's holding and reasoning flow directly from neoclassical economic theory, which assumes a perfect (political) market and resists government intervention aimed at correcting power imbalances and anti-competitive behavior. This laissez-faire stance is not new to the Court, but it had been in decline during Chief Justice Rehnquist's long tenure. Citizens resuscitates a line of neoclassical jurisprudence that traces back to the mid-1970s, in particular to Buckley v. Valeo and First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti. After summarizing the neoclassical assumptions of Citizens, this Article provides a thorough explanation and critique of these past cases which, in essence, imported economic theory to determine the meaning of democracy. Justice Stevens's dissenting opinion in Citizens, and alternatives to neoclassical ideology more generally, are discussed in conclusion. In sum, this Article offers two basic contributions to the literature, the first descriptive and the second normative: it explains the neoclassical underpinnings of the line of cases that culminate in Citizens, thus offering a new way to understand the dominant ideology on the Roberts Court; and it provides an argument, rooted in institutional economic theory and separatist philosophy, that the market sphere should not govern the political sphere.
Download PDF
|
Full Table of Contents
Volume: 18.3 Fall 2011
Articles
When Enough is Not Enough: Correcting Market Inefficiences in the Purchase and Sale of Residential Property Insurance
Kenneth S. Klein PDF
Citizens United as Neoliberal Jurisprudence: The Resurgence of Economic Theory
Timothy K. Kuhner PDF
When Bad Things Happen to Good Laws: The Rise, Fall, and Future of Section 48
Abigail Lauren Perdue PDF
Exceptions: The Criminal Law's Illogical Approach to HIV-Related Aggravated Assaults
Ari Ezra Waldman PDF
U.S. Government Unlawfully Detaining and Deporting U.S. Citizens as Aliens
Jacqueline Stevens PDF
|
|
Copyright © 2009 by the Virginia Journal of Social Policy and the Law.
Although this organization has members who are University of Virginia students and may have University employees associated or engaged in its activities and affairs, the organization is not a part of or an agency of the University. It is a separate and independent organization which is responsible for and manages its own activities and affairs. The University does not direct, supervise or control the organization and is not responsible for the organization's contracts, acts or omissions.
The University of Virginia Law School The University of Virginia |
