|Click the button below to search for articles...|
View News Items from prior months...
|Michigan Voters Oppose Cuts to Auto Injury Benefits|
LANSING Nearly two-thirds of Michigan voters oppose the insurance industrys efforts to avoid paying for the extensive medical care the states auto no-fault law requires them to provide severely injured motorists, a survey released today by the Coalition Protecting Auto No-Fault (CPAN) shows. The results come as Michigan lawmakers consider insurer-backed legislation that would gut the states 39-year-old no-fault auto insurance law, which is considered a national model.
Impact of Proposed "PIP Choice" Law in Michigan
The purpose of this report is to quantify the effects that the proposed legislation would have on the output, earnings, and employment of Michigan's industries, as well as discuss its effects on individuals.
(The Michigan Legislature, in 2011, was considering amending the Michigan Code of Insurance to significantly lower the minimum amount of personal injury protection drivers are required to purchase. The proposed legislation would have allowed policy holders to choose from the following levels of PIP coverage for products and services necessary to an injured person's care, recovery and rehabilitation: $50,000, $100,000, $200,000, $400,000 and $500,00 and lifetime.)
The Impact of Reducing PIP Coverage in Michigan
In the fall of 2010, the Michigan Brain Injury Provider Council:1 asked Public Sector Consultants (PSC) to analyze the potential impact of limiting the amount of coverage required for personal protection insurance (also referred to as personal injury protection or PIP) under Michiganās no fault system for reparations related to automobile accidents. A recent report has suggested that automobile insurance rates and the percentage of automobile owners carrying the required coverage are adversely affected by Michiganās current requirement for PIP coverage, 2 but the benefits that could be lost and the potential for cost-shifting if the coverage requirement is modified have not been thoroughly explored. To more fully understand the potential impact of reducing the coverage requirement for PIP under Michiganās No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act, we have examined the following issues:
ļ® What benefits are associated with personal protection insurance required under Michiganās current no-fault system?
ļ® What is the cost burden associated with catastrophic motor vehicleārelated injuries, specifically traumatic brain injuries (TBI)?
ļ® Who currently pays for costs associated with motor vehicleārelated injuries and how might the cost burden be shifted to the state and other payers if the coverage requirement for PIP were reduced?