In our last Diving Deeper with MBIPC, we detailed the barriers preventing the advancement of Senate Bills 530, 531 and 575 in the House of Representatives Insurance and Financial Services Committee. Since then, there have been significant developments, including a grassroots social media campaign, a productive meeting with Chair Brenda Carter, and the most insightful interview regarding the current state of auto insurance in Michigan.

In our last Diving Deeper with MBIPC, we detailed the barriers preventing the advancement of Senate Bills 530, 531 and 575 in the House of Representatives Insurance and Financial Services Committee. Since then, there have been significant developments, including a grassroots social media campaign, a productive meeting with Chair Brenda Carter, and the most insightful interview regarding the current state of auto insurance in Michigan.

It has been over four months since the Senate passed a package of bills (SB 530, 531 and 575) aimed at ending the Crisis in Care with bi-partisan support. These bills provided narrow solutions with a reasonable fee schedule for essential post-acute rehabilitation and long-term care services, as well as an adjustment to allow more autonomy and choice for families to provide direct care to their injured loved ones.

On November 14th Michigan Legislature adjourned early, ending session for the remainder of this calendar year, In a process coined “sine die”.

In the last few weeks, bills to end the Crisis in Care had a second hearing in the Senate Finance, Insurance and Consumer Protection Committee.

For the first time in four years, a bill package with solutions to end the Crisis in Care is getting the attention it deserves.

After dispelling the myths promulgated by the insurance industry that everyone is receiving quality care and that the fee cap system implemented under the no-fault reform law is a “common-sense” cost control, we conclude this series by countering their absurd summary statement that the “reforms are working.”

Another prominent piece of misinformation consistently put forward by the insurance industry is that the fee schedule is a necessary “cost control.” When we look closely at this claim, we quickly see that the 45% reduction in reimbursement only controls access to long-term care with little impact on the overall cost of car insurance.

While it is hard to move on from the outrageous and offensive dismissal of suffering, our next segment will focus on perhaps the most often-used rhetoric by the insurance industry regarding the fee cap system: their go-to labeling of the reimbursement system as “common sense.”

In the next series of posts in Diving Deeper with MBIPC, we will debunk the myths surrounding the fee schedule from the insurance industry and counter their misinformation with facts.

As MBIPC’s inaugural executive director, I'm excited to announce that our association is launching a new communications feature.