After months of controversy, the General Assembly has passed legislation which its sponsors say will solve the liability insurance crisis. I voted against the measure, and I`d like to tell you why.
For months, my constituents have been calling and writing, to relate their difficulties with the cost of liability insurance–that is, when they could get insurance at all. But my constituents never got a chance to let their voices be heard–this legislation was drafted behind closed doors in a back room of the Capitol. As your state representative, I wanted the opportunity to, at the very least, bring your concerns to the floor during debate. Instead, we were denied the opportunity to discuss the individual issues–we had one vote on the entire package, ”yes” or ”no.”
Among the provisions included in the bill were many I simply could not support. It allows local governments to issue general obligation or revenue bonds without referendum. That`s a dangerous practice which could result in large tax increases for property owners, without giving them any say in the matter. Furthermore, a major factor behind the crisis is joint and several liability, which this bill addresses but it`s much too weak to really help. Anyone found to be more than 25 percent at fault could be forced to pay an entire settlement. That`s not all–this bill denies even that small measure of relief to our hospitals, a fact that could lead to increases in hospital costs.
These are just a few examples of the many flaws in this legislation. I cast my ”no” vote, hoping that the report would be rejected, giving us the chance to develop real reforms in a second conference committee. Unfortunately for us all, that did not take place. Senate Bill 1200 will not solve the liability insurance crisis–it only places a Band-Aid on a gaping wound.
