The FTCR said it had found a draft of the initiatives posted on the Web site of the Association of California Insurance Companies, apparently by accident last week.

Sam Sorich, president of the ACIC, acknowledged that the draft had been posted, but said the group was not the behind the initiatives and had only been asked to review them.

"We're not sponsoring the initiative at all," he said.

Mr. Sorich added that the ACIC has not decided yet whether it would support the initiatives. "We don't have a position," on them, he said. "The initiatives are being evaluated, but no decision has been made by the association."

Mr. Rosenfield said that the origins of the initiatives have become unclear, with many in the insurance industry denying that it came from them.

He speculated that there are two likely reasons for this, the first being that the insurers were hoping to hide their involvement behind another group, such as the Chamber of Commerce.

"Once they are tagged with the initiative, as they now are, it becomes very difficult for the insurance industry to get voters to support any insurance industry initiatives, because the people don't trust them," Mr. Rosenfield said. "That's what they found in 1988, and I don't think it would be any different this time."

The other possible theory, he said, is that the initiatives were the act of "one lone crook," and that the majority of the insurance industry in California does not want to get involved in the campaign for the initiatives.

FTCR has estimated that such an effort would cost as much as $200 million. That amount, said Mr. Rosenfield, "would be in line with what they spent in 1988," considering for inflation.

The initiatives include two versions entitled "the Insurance Fair Rates and Discounts Act" and one known as "the Auto Insurance Fair Rates and Discounts Act." They were received by the state Attorney General on December 29, 2005.

Among the major changes made by the proposed initiatives is one that would effectively reverse a regulation proposed last month by State Insurance Commissioner John Garamendi to bar giving greater weight to the location of a car, when determining auto insurance rates, than factors such as driving record, miles driven and years of driving experience.

The California Insurance Department has scheduled a workshop on the proposed regulation for Jan. 12 and a formal hearing for late February, and although the insurance industry is opposing the proposed regulation, Mr. Sorich the ACIC had no intention of trying to use the ballot initiatives for leverage.

"That would not go into our testimony on the rating factors at all," he said, adding further that at this point "it's not clear if any of these initiatives would even be on the ballot in November."

Additionally, the FTCR said that initiatives would allow insurers to raise rates without the commissioner's approval, legalize premium surcharges and allow state lawmakers to repeal any other parts of Proposition 103.

As a voter approved law, the state legislature is prohibited from making changes to the law by the state constitution, unless those changes further the spirit of the proposition.

"The voters took matters into their own hands and passed 103 because the legislature was too corrupted with industry money to pass reforms," said Mr. Rosenfield. "If the industry proposal passes, the insurance lobby will buy the repeal of the rest of Prop 103 within a year."

Currently the initiatives have been filed with the state Attorney General's office. To move forward, the initiatives would have to receive a title and summary from that office, and would then be sent to the California Secretary of State.

The Secretary of State will then do its own evaluation of the proposal, determining if the proposal should move forward, and, if so, how many signatures their sponsors must obtain to get it on the ballot.