Conference 35.181::insurance

126.0. "Insurance reform concerning seatbelt use" by ERLANG::MILLEVILLE () Thu Jul 16 1992 08:29

Following this is a letter I sent to the named AAA Lobbyist concerning an insur-
ance reform idea I came up with that may improve seatbelt wearing percentage
without their being mandated.  Initially, he stated this was a good idea worth
looking at more thoroughly.  He stated he has received this letter and will be
doing research into whether or not an idea of this type has been proposed
before.  No action on his part will be possible until September since legisla-
tion isn't submitted until November.

I would be very interested in what the insurance industry people out there think
of this proposal.


							(address)
							July 8, 1992

    AAA Massachusetts
    1050 Hingham St.
    Rockland, MA  02370

    Attn: Mr. Art Kinsman

    Mr. Kinsman:

	Per our  conversation yesterday,  this is the letter I promised you.
    In order  to  present my  idea for insurance reform in the best light, I
    am enhancing the letter I sent to 'AAA World'.

	Presently, there are laws in some states that mandate seatbelt wear.
    Many people, right or wrong, feel this infringes on their right to free-
    dom of choice.  Further reform  is needed  to not  only allow  people to
    exercise  their freedom,  but to  teach them  of at  least the financial
    value of wearing seatbelts.

	My proposal  is  for insurance  companies to  lower their  rates for
    their basic policies upon the assumption that ALL their policyholders DO
    wear seatbelts.  If the  policyholder does not wear belts and wants full
    coverage, they can  select an extra cost purely optional rider.  If they
    do not select this rider and do not wear belts, the risk passes from the
    insurance company  to the policyholder.  The burden of proof shifts from
    the policy  holder to  the insurance company.  This will allow  complete
    freedom of choice in seatbelt wear, but passes the financial burden only
    to those who want to take that additional risk.

	Suppose they are  involved in an accident and injury(ies) occur.  It
    will then  be up to the insurance company to prove via medical evidence,
    statistics, accident  report, etc.  that the  injured occupants were not
    wearing seatbelts  AND that the injuries sustained would  have been less
    if they  had been worn.  If proved  in each  instance, to  be determined
    coverage limitations as specified  in the policy could be imposed on the
    covered party.  If they  were wearing seatbelts, or their wear would not
    have reduced their injuries, the insurance company would be obligated to
    full policy coverage.

	Once those who don't wear seatbelts see  the financial  suffering of
    others caused  by the  lack of  wearing them,  they will be convinced to
    either  have the  rider added  to their insurance plan or to start wear-
    ing seatbelts.  Seatbelt usage  percentage will  increase due  to people
    being convinced,  not forced  by law.  If and  when this  happens, lives
    will be  saved, untold  needless suffering will be prevented, and a very
    significant amount of money will be saved.

							Sincerely,


							Dan P. Milleville

A letter from (MA State) Representative Barbara E. Gray says this about my
proposal:

       "Your proposal of not mandating the use of seatbelts is interes-
	ting and we are considering the idea.  I would like to see all
	citizens protecting themselves by wearing seatbelts and possibly
	your proposal would give citizens an incentive other than the
	obvious, that of their lives."