With respect to that $45 billion middle class “tax cut” I told you about a couple of weeks ago . . . it would come via reductions in the cost of your car insurance . . . I forgot to include what the New York Times editorial page had to say a few months ago:

“Trial lawyers contribute heavily to state and Federal politicians, largely because they want to block reforms that would eliminate excessive litigation that follows automobile accidents and other mishaps. For the most part they have succeeded, but their gain is the average driver’s loss. Americans pay punishingly high premiums, much of which land in lawyers’ bank accounts. Now, however, bipartisan proposals in Washington and New Jersey would give drivers, especially those who are poor, substantial relief . . . . The new proposals would give families the option of forgoing suits for non-monetary losses in exchange for quick and complete reimbursement for every blow to their pocketbooks. Everyone would win — except the lawyers.”

And remember, this is the New York Times, not exactly a right-wing outfit willing to trample the rights of the aggrieved or the poor.

Right now, you are forced to buy policies that pay insurance-company lawyers $150 an hour to fight your claim, and contingent-fee lawyers who take 40% of any money you do win. The Auto-Choice bill Senators Moynihan, Lieberman, McConnell and Gorton, among others, are pushing would allow you to opt out of this crazy system. Is your congressman on board? Or has he come to rely too heavily on trial-lawyer campaign contributions?



Comments are closed.