Senator Calls New Insurance Laws Deadly and Scary
Florida Senator Mike Fasano is not afraid to talk about the elephant in the room. Yesterday, he called the proposed insurance bill "scary." A blog in the Miami Herald, Fasano: Why debate sinkhole coverage if no one will provide it anymore? reported:
[T]his bill, he said, is deadly to consumers. A bill like this, he said, would never have come forward under governors Jeb Bush or Charlie Crist, but with uber-business friendly Rick Scott leading the state, legislators are feeling emboldened with a bill that is overly generous to the insurance industry. "It's scary," he said.
My impression of the proposed legislation was noted in Draconian Property Insurance Bill Filed in Florida Senate. Deadly, scary and draconian sound pretty bad for the consumers of insurance. I wonder why others don't see it that way?
I think Fasano answered that question in the above quote. Some in our Legislature feel the insurance industry and its concerns are paramount to the interests of many policyholders. There seems to be little listening to reason and good public policy from the consumer's view. Hopefully, the debate will change and honest reflection through study of issues will occur. Otherwise, Mike Fasano's prediction about the impact of these proposed insurance laws as currently written are the same as mine.
Chip
I think Artiles and/or policyholder representatives should draft a compromised bill. Eventually these guys are going to break through and get this ridiculous bill or another like it passed.
If we try to beat them to the punch with a similar bill that gives and takes from both sides as a compromise we may dodge this bullet. Maybe give them some sinkhole provisions and allow ACV dictated per policy. At the same time mandate that all policies be of like and include the appraisal provision within.
Instead of trying to battle so many high powered guns and risk the huge chance of loss, beat them with a compromise. Artiles is there, I think we need to greatly consider his position.
Only my thoughts.
So we consumers of insurance faired well under Crist?
Mitch,
I guess some wish for the good old days because it is obvious to those of us with experience that think the proposed legislation shows a complete inndifference to consumers. There is no fair debate. It is being orchestrated by the insurance lobby with the blessing of those in the legislature.
At the Windstorm Conference, an engineer that does work for insurers told me he is helping a Florida legislator re-write language for the definition of sinkhole damage. All aspects of the the language of the bill is driven by the insurance industry.
Did you ever see anything this bad proposed by legislators when Bush or Crist were governors?
And, just for the record, I am not saying that there is not a need for change of sinkhole legislation if we cannot afford it. What that language should be and an honest explanation for the change should be part of the discussion.
Thanks for the commment.
Alabama,
Thoughts are great. We need your action!!!
Pick out the laws you would suggest change and write something. Send those to me, Sean Shaw and Frank. We'll see what we can do for you.
And, will you commit some time to promote the reasons for the change? We need people's time and effort. Insurance companies have an army of lobbyists that are at this 365 days a year spinning articles and trying to create an atmosphere for change promoting their agenda. These large corporate interests have full time people paid to do what the rest of us have to volunteer to do. Some of our elected representatives and many regulators only hear one side of the story.
Indeed, some staffers for the regulators and our elected leaders were lobbyists or worked for lobbyists for the insurance industry. The media could write a story on that!