Sen. Jeff Brandes said Wednesday that it was legislative malpractice for the Senate to consider repealing Florida’s no-fault insurance program and replacing it with a fault-based system without knowing how that would affect car insurance rates for Florida drivers.
Brandes made the remarks shortly before the Senate Banking and Insurance Committee voted 10-1 to pass SB 150filed by Sen. Danny Burgess.
The chairman of the committee, the senator Jim Boydwhich allowed testimony earlier in the meeting on two of its bills, said the committee did not have time to consider public debate before the vote.
The bill is almost identical to that of a governor. Ron DeSantis vetoed last year after Pinnacle’s release of analysis showed the proposal could raise rates by an average of $202. But Burgess told members of the Senate Banking and Insurance Committee that Pinnacle actuaries erred when they estimated the cost impact of the 2021 legislation. Burgess said when developing their assumptions, Pinnacle actuaries assumed that each driver would choose to purchase a $10,000 MedPay policy to ensure they had coverage for health care needs resulting from traffic accidents.
While the bill required carriers to offer the $10,000 MedPay policy, it allowed drivers to opt out of coverage.
Additionally, Burgess said the bill did not take into account the cost savings associated with the bill’s bad faith reforms.
President of the Senate wilton simpson wants to repeal the state’s no-fault auto insurance system that requires drivers to carry $10,000 in personal injury protection (PIP) insurance.
Instead of PIP, the state would revert to a fault-based system and people would be required to cover mandatory bodily injury.
house tenant Chris Sprows also supports repeal.
But insurance companies do not support the measure. Fearing that the bill would raise rates or increase the number of drivers on the road without insurance, Progressive and the Personal Insurance Federation of Florida oppose it. The same goes for State Farm.
Brandes asked Burgess if proponents of the repeal of the PIP conducted a different analysis, but Burgess said no. Brandes was not satisfied with the response.
“Sen. Burgess, I feel a little bad for you. You were asked to charge a hill that had machine guns on it. You were shot down and you are being asked to take the same hill with no more troops, no more resources and, frankly, with rubber bullets. This is basically, in my opinion, a legislative error. If we are going to talk about the lives of millions of Floridians and we haven’t, over the course of the summer, got an actuarial study… I don’t know how a member can vote on that.