I’ve mentioned the debate in Florida over whether to renew the state’s no-fault insurance law previously. Currently it seems rather likely that no-fault will lapse due to an inability for the Florida state Senate and House to agree on what to do.
The Miami Herald mentions an unintended consequence of a potential lapse:
After Oct. 1, Florida drivers will no longer be required to carry auto insurance.
That’s the unintended consequence of lawmakers’ inaction during the regular legislative session that ended two weeks ago.
The state’s controversial no-fault law, which requires drivers to buy at least $10,000 in personal injury protection, or PIP, and $25,000 in property damage liability, is set to expire because lawmakers failed to extend it or replace it with another insurance requirement.
In other words, the mandatory minimum insurance provision that exists in most states was included in the measure which expires.
Oops.
I’ve written previously about my thoughts on mandatory insurance laws. The core of the issue in my mind is weighing the conflicting concerns of:
- In a free society, individuals should be free to make their own financial choices.
- However, why should I have to pay more for UM coverage because you choose not to be able to indemnify those you may injure when operating a car?
- Insurance is not always cheap. Some folks who have a perceived need to operate a car are the least able to afford coverage.
Not surprisingly, those same issues are quickly touched upon in the Herald article.
I’ll repeat my earlier opinion that I’m slightly biased towards mandatory insurance, but I think there could be better mechanisms in place to fund coverage…and pricing for excess-of-minimum coverage ought to be deregulated in a trade-off to make that happen.
There’s an open question as to whether the Florida state legislature will address the issue during a special session this summer. Maybe they will work on getting an “emergency” bill out, since I doubt they intended for all mandatory insurance requirements to be drop.