LANSING – The executives of the state’s three biggest counties, at a joint press conference Monday, urged Michigan legislators to reject proposed changes to the state’s auto insurance system. Supporters of the changes said the three officials were out of their depth to weigh in on the plans.
Wayne County Executive Robert Ficano, Macomb County Executive Mark Hackel and Oakland County Executive L. Brooks Patterson urged the Legislature to reject any plan that would reduce the current unlimited medical care for those injured in vehicle crashes.
“Together, we are sending a powerful message to Lansing to urge our legislators to stand against big insurance companies overturning the will of the people,” Patterson said. “Speaker Bolger calls the new bill a ‘compromise.’ I call it a death sentence for individuals recovering from catastrophic injuries.”
The three argued that the savings from changes proposed by House Speaker Jase Bolger (R-Marshall) would be minimal.
But Pete Kuhnmuench, executive director of the Insurance Institute of Michigan, said the three executives were trying to gain political points at the expense of their constituents’ pocketbooks.
“It’s unfortunate that local city and county politicians are wading into a topic they know nothing about and trying to gain political points by claiming they are supporting the common man by opposing the current no-fault reform efforts of House Speaker Jase Bolger,” Kuhnmuench said. “The reality is, Speaker Bolger recognizes the growing costs of Michigan’s one-of-a-kind no-fault system and is attempting to offer solutions.”
The key problem with the system, he said, is the lack of controls on hospital charges.
Bolger’s proposal would include a fee schedule to limit charges, Tom Shields, spokesperson for the Coalition for Auto Insurance Reform, said in a statement.
“All Michigan drivers deserve the exact same quality of care L. Brooks Patterson has received and they shouldn’t have to pay more to receive it,” Shields said in a reference to the major injuries Mr. Patterson sustained in an auto accident. “It’s time to close this loophole that allows medical providers to gouge auto accident victims and drive up the costs of auto insurance for everyone.”
Patterson has argued against limiting medical care for crash victims in part because of his own recent experience, but supporters of the change said Mr. Patterson’s care was covered by worker’s compensation because he was travelling for work at the time of the crash. That care, they said, was covered under fee schedules rather than the open billing provided under the no-fault act.
This story was provided by Gongwer News Service. To subscribe, click on Gongwer.Com
