Eric Zorn’s column “Insurance law may be driven by profit,” (Metro, April 16), reflecting on the questionable benefits of mandatory uninsured motorist insurance coverage, was both intriguing and mistaken.
The National Association of Independent Insurers (NAII) opposes laws mandating uninsured motorist coverage. In fact, the NAII opposes laws mandating the purchase of auto insurance. We have several reasons for this.
First, these laws don’t work. Mandatory insurance laws have never successfully eliminated the uninsured motorist problem. In states with such laws, uninsured motorists still make up 4 to 40 percent of the driving population.
Second, these laws force local governments to spend precious resources in enforcement against all drivers, the vast majority of whom are insured.
Of the 7.6 million drivers in Illinois, 12.1 percent are still estimated to be uninsured, according to the Federal Highway Administration and the Insurance Research Council. Because mandatory insurance laws don’t remove all uninsured drivers from the road, the NAII supports the recommendation that drivers purchase uninsured motorist coverage to protect themselves from irresponsible drivers.
But unlike Zorn implied, we don’t support state mandates to purchase uninsured motorist coverage. We strongly support a free-market, private-enterprise system that allows consumers flexibility and choice in insurance products.
Finally, Zorn suggests that the mandatory uninsured motorist coverage might be a “nice little profit engine” inserted in a “dense, poorly understood area of state law.” This gives the impression that insurance company profits are somehow unscrupulous or underhanded. The insurance industry, which employs about 140,000 Illinoisans and pays more than $140 million in premium taxes and about a quarter of a billion dollars in state and local taxes per year, is in business to make an honest buck, as is the newspaper industry.
