Bill bans higher premiums for owners of larger dogs

PHOENIX — Are some dog breeds more inherently dangerous than others?

Not according to most members of the House Government and Elections Committee, who want to make that conclusion part of state law.

The panel voted 10-3 Wednesday to prohibit insurers from charging higher homeowner premiums for owners of certain types of dogs than for others.

The vote came over the objections of industry lobbyists, who said the pricing differences are justified. There is actuarial data on the severity of injuries caused by certain breeds, said Wendy Briggs of the American Property and Casualty Insurance Association.

“If you have a larger breed dog with a larger jaw, they are going to do more damage,” she told lawmakers. “There are many medical journal studies that demonstrate that.”

That explanation didn’t wash with Rep. John Kavanagh, R-Fountain Hills, sponsor of the legislation, House Bill 2323.

He said it would be one thing if insurers charged liability premiums based on the weight of the animal.

“But why is a German shepherd being charged more, and not a collie?” Kavanagh asked. “That kind of throws your argument out the window.”

He had the backing of various animal welfare advocates.

“Arizonans do not want insurance companies telling them what kind of pet they can have,” said Michelle Simpson, an attorney who volunteers at animal shelters and pet rescue centers, including one devoted to pit bulls.

She said shelters have an “incredible overpopulation” of pets, with more than 30,000 a year going through Maricopa County alone each year.

“A majority of those pets are those that would be excluded by these insurance policies,” Simpson told lawmakers. “And, therefore, these pets are at risk of euthanasia every day.”

Rep. John Fillmore, R-Apache Junction, said the higher premiums charged for certain larger dogs are based on a mistaken assumption they are more aggressive.

For him, Exhibit No. 1 is a small Shih Tzu owned by his brother. “Every time I go visit he bites me,” said Fillmore, calling the arguments by insurance companies “a little convoluted.”

Rep. Alma Hernandez, D-Tucson, spoke of her own experiences.

“I would say that my Chihuahuas are probably more aggressive than my large dogs,” she said. “I just want to caution that when we’re talking about the type of breed of animals, a lot of times it’s how the people that trained the animals, or the owners, that makes the dogs act the way that they do.”

Kavanagh said there’s something else to consider: “A majority of dogs are mutts, just like human beings are.”

That means, absent a DNA test, there is no clear way to tell exactly what breed or breeds are involved, he said.

But Rep. Teresa Martinez, R-Casa Grande, said the legislation ignores the reality that not all dog breeds are the same.

“We’re not using poodles and Chihuahuas for police dogs,” she said.

Even if Chihuahuas are aggressive, “I mean, you just kick them,” Martinez said. “Who’s going to be afraid of that?”

Police use German shepherds because “inherently, DNA, they are more disciplined and they are easier to control and they have intimidating features,” she said.

Rep. Jake Hoffman, R-Queen Creek, also voted against the measure. He said the record shows the owners of larger dogs have other options for insurance if their own carrier wants to raise their rates or cancel their coverage.

The measure now needs approval of the full House.