Protection of Consumers' Insurance Plans Act (Law'd)

[TNF]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor: Senator Cranberry


You have 24 hours to begin advocacy, Senator.

[Cranberry]

Thank you Mr President Pro Tempore for bringing this bill to the floor.

It has become some problem that insurance companies often alter conditions, or withdraw totally existing plans after they had to pay once, especially after natural disasters. This bill, pretty self-explationary, aims to work against this, by forcing insurance companies to pay out what they agreed for.

[Dr. Cynic]

I agree with the aims of this legislation. How unfair is it, not to mention entirely unethical, for a company to make a promise and then rescind it once it becomes inconvenient to them to live up to the bargain? Hopefully, this bill will pass.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I support this.

I would caution that in some disasters, gov't backstopping might be necessary to avoid bankrupting the companies. I am not sure how that would function and we don't want to create adverse incentives that cause insurance to become like Investment Banks 2008

[Cranberry]

Of course this might be necessary sometimes, this is not altered by this bill. We just prohibit them from changing the plans after they have cashed good for a long time and now would need to buy. So we don't change any great rules, we just ensure that insurers have to pay for what they got.

[Lumine]

This seems very sensible to me, these companies shouldn't be allowed to change the rules in the middle of a disaster, especially considering the damage that consumers would have to face. When we had the earthquake back in 2010 (in Chile) there were some complications regarding the insurance companies, so I support the bill.

[Cranberry]

Great! 
There was a similar problem last year in Austria after a series of big floods. This bill should get away with these problems.

[DemPGH]

Oh, yes, I support this of course. It's bad enough that insurance companies make you add clauses to your plan or contract to cover you in case of this or that, but reneging after a disaster is unconscionable. You're paying for insurance, so you should get it.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Of course this might be necessary sometimes, this is not altered by this bill. We just prohibit them from changing the plans after they have cashed good for a long time and now would need to buy. So we don't change any great rules, we just ensure that insurers have to pay for what they got.

My only point was one of a solvency standpoint. A big disaster could leave people just as high and dry if the companies go out of business. This happened back in the 19th century, though you might be right that a system is already in place for that in which case, it is a non-issue.

In the absence of that, I fully support the bill.

[TNF]

What will we be doing here now? Is a final vote desired?

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

This is fair and just. Contracts shouldn't be changed except at the consent of both parties and that should be protected.

[Cranberry]

A final vote would be the best, since apparently everyone is okay with that bill.

[TNF]

Senators, a final vote is now open on the Protection of Consumers' Insurance Plans Act. Please vote Aye, Nay, or Abstain.

[TNF]

Aye

[Cranberry]

Aye

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

AYE

[bore]

Aye

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

Aye

[Cassius]

Aye

[TNF]

With six votes in the affirmative and none opposed, the Protection of Consumers' Insurance Plans Act has passed the 63rd Senate of the Republic of Atlasia and is presented to the President for executive action.

Aye(s): President Pro Tempore TNF, Senator Cranberry, Senator Polnut, Senator bore, Senator JCL, Senator Cassius
Nay(s): None
Abstaining: None
Not voting: Senator Cynic, Senator Deus, Senator North Carolina Yankee, Senator Lumine

[DemPGH]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

X DemPGH, President

I'll go ahead and sign this, then - this is an easy one. There is simply no reason why an insurance company should not uphold its end of the bargain with customers. 

[Lumine]

I recognize the bill has passed and I planned to vote for it, but leave just six hours for a vote?

[bore]

It's the senate rules Lumine. If a bill has enough votes to pass and no votes against it can be ended immediately. Think of it as a positive sign of activity.

[TNF]

I recognize the bill has passed and I planned to vote for it, but leave just six hours for a vote?

No votes were cast to the contrary and the bill achieved a majority. Take it up with the OSRP, not me.

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

The vote must go it's full time. Regardless of number of aye or nay votes. Lumine has cause on this one.