
Decision Maker
Michigan State House

Decision Maker
Michigan State House

Thank you for contacting my office through this Change.org petition, “To change the laws regarding the Auto Insurance Policies form No-fault to At-fault policies and demolish the “unlimited” personal payout to the insured involved in accidents”. While there are my many different sides to the no-fault issues that had been portrayed in the media so may believe that by just eliminating the no-fault system and becoming an at-fault system will “cure” high automobile insurance rates in the State of Michigan. That is just untrue. Michigan voted for a no-fault system and then voted again (in or around 1994) to keep that no-fault system. The elimination of lifetime coverage for catastrophic accidents will result in a substantial cost shift to the Medicaid and Medicare systems, thus raising taxes and forcing competition for a very limited pot of funds. The under-funding of treatment for severely injured auto accident victims will result in thousands of jobs lost in the medical care industry. Michigan residents who cannot afford the highest level of coverage created under this legislation could face inadequate medical care or financial ruin if a catastrophic injury results from an auto accident. If those proposing such reforms were serious about reducing auto rates in Michigan, they would look at the MCCA (Michigan Catastrophic Claims Association). MCCA is a private organization that provides for the care of Michigan drivers who are catastrophically injured in an auto accident. It reimburses no-fault auto insurers for all benefits that exceed $500,000, spreading costs among all motorists since every Michigan driver is required by law to carry valid insurance. The association has raised its annual rates from $5.60 to $175 per insured vehicle since 2000 – an increase of 2,489 percent, without having to explain whether these increases are necessary. All the voting members of the board represent big insurance companies. Insurance companies claim that the reforms are needed because the MCCA is not financially stable enough to continue reimbursing for catastrophic claims. Yet financial information regarding the MCCA is not public and these claims are impossible to verify. It has been estimated that the MCCA controls $14.9 billion in assets, yet the insurance industry refuses to support legislation that would require the MCCA be subject to public scrutiny. In March of this year, I introduced bi-partisan legislation to add accountability and transparency to the insurance industry. The bills would: • Make the MCCA Board subject to the Open Meetings Act and the Freedom of Information Act. This means that decisions must be made at public meetings and documents must be made available upon request. • Add one member representing the public to the MCCA Board and makes the Commissioner of the Office of Financial and Insurance Regulation (OFIR) a voting member. • Require that an independent Certified Public Accountant appointed by the Commissioner conduct an annual audit of MCCA and report to OFIR and the House and Senate Insurance Committees. Additionally, the Detroit Caucus has been working on an alternative package that would ACTUALLY help lower insurance rates. Among the topics we are focused on are eliminating file and use, a practice which allows insurance companies to raise rates without any justification; preventing insurers from considering education, credit score and occupation when they are calculating premiums and surcharges (currently under this practice a convicted drunk driver will actually have a lower insurance rate than a person with a perfect driving record and less education); requiring insurers to spend 80% of their premiums on clients or refund the difference, and several other important factors that could result in lower premiums for drivers in Michigan. Every Michigan driver will be affected by the proposed changes to our no fault insurance system. We deserve to know the full picture before making a decision that will have such broad sweeping and potentially negative consequences. I could not support any auto insurance reforms that did not look at every component of auto insurance to truly decrease rates across the board. Thank you again for contacting me regarding issues that are important to you. Believe me as someone who insurers multiple vehicles with three young drivers in my household, and living just miles outside the city of Detroit, I would love to have been able to tackle the issue of high auto insurance rates. Sincerely, Phil Cavanagh State Representative, 10th District
Thank you for contacting my office through this Change.org petition, “To change the laws regarding the Auto Insurance Policies form No-fault to At-fault policies and demolish the “unlimited” personal payout to the insured involved in accidents”. While there are my many different sides to the no-fault issues that had been portrayed in the media so may believe that by just eliminating the no-fault system and becoming an at-fault system will “cure” high automobile insurance rates in the State of Michigan. That is just untrue. Michigan voted for a no-fault system and then voted again (in or around 1994) to keep that no-fault system. The elimination of lifetime coverage for catastrophic accidents will result in a substantial cost shift to the Medicaid and Medicare systems, thus raising taxes and forcing competition for a very limited pot of funds. The under-funding of treatment for severely injured auto accident victims will result in thousands of jobs lost in the medical care industry. Michigan residents who cannot afford the highest level of coverage created under this legislation could face inadequate medical care or financial ruin if a catastrophic injury results from an auto accident. If those proposing such reforms were serious about reducing auto rates in Michigan, they would look at the MCCA (Michigan Catastrophic Claims Association). MCCA is a private organization that provides for the care of Michigan drivers who are catastrophically injured in an auto accident. It reimburses no-fault auto insurers for all benefits that exceed $500,000, spreading costs among all motorists since every Michigan driver is required by law to carry valid insurance. The association has raised its annual rates from $5.60 to $175 per insured vehicle since 2000 – an increase of 2,489 percent, without having to explain whether these increases are necessary. All the voting members of the board represent big insurance companies. Insurance companies claim that the reforms are needed because the MCCA is not financially stable enough to continue reimbursing for catastrophic claims. Yet financial information regarding the MCCA is not public and these claims are impossible to verify. It has been estimated that the MCCA controls $14.9 billion in assets, yet the insurance industry refuses to support legislation that would require the MCCA be subject to public scrutiny. In March of this year, I introduced bi-partisan legislation to add accountability and transparency to the insurance industry. The bills would: • Make the MCCA Board subject to the Open Meetings Act and the Freedom of Information Act. This means that decisions must be made at public meetings and documents must be made available upon request. • Add one member representing the public to the MCCA Board and makes the Commissioner of the Office of Financial and Insurance Regulation (OFIR) a voting member. • Require that an independent Certified Public Accountant appointed by the Commissioner conduct an annual audit of MCCA and report to OFIR and the House and Senate Insurance Committees. Additionally, the Detroit Caucus has been working on an alternative package that would ACTUALLY help lower insurance rates. Among the topics we are focused on are eliminating file and use, a practice which allows insurance companies to raise rates without any justification; preventing insurers from considering education, credit score and occupation when they are calculating premiums and surcharges (currently under this practice a convicted drunk driver will actually have a lower insurance rate than a person with a perfect driving record and less education); requiring insurers to spend 80% of their premiums on clients or refund the difference, and several other important factors that could result in lower premiums for drivers in Michigan. Every Michigan driver will be affected by the proposed changes to our no fault insurance system. We deserve to know the full picture before making a decision that will have such broad sweeping and potentially negative consequences. I could not support any auto insurance reforms that did not look at every component of auto insurance to truly decrease rates across the board. Thank you again for contacting me regarding issues that are important to you. Believe me as someone who insurers multiple vehicles with three young drivers in my household, and living just miles outside the city of Detroit, I would love to have been able to tackle the issue of high auto insurance rates. Sincerely, Phil Cavanagh State Representative, 10th District

Thank you for contacting regarding updating the Elliot-Larsen Civil Rights Act to protect Michiganders against discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. Michigan’s business economy has been involved in a global war for talent for years, looking for the brightest workforce to compete in our 21st century economy regardless of sexual orientation and gender identity. This was a topic of conversation amongst business leaders at the Detroit Regional Chamber Mackinac Policy Conference in May and have been advocating for a change in the state’s civil rights law. Sixty-five percent of residents support making Michigan an equal opportunity state and that percentage goes up even higher among younger residents. Our state’s economic health depends on the ability of Michigan’s cities to be competitive in attracting both job creators and those seeking employment. September 10, 2014, bills were introduced in the House and Senate to amend the Elliot-Larsen Civil Rights Act to include sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression. Discrimination in any form is wrong and these bills would provide immediate protections for people. I am in support for updating the Elliot-Larsen Civil Rights Act but there are many different versions and amendments proposed, so I have to see what is presented for a vote. I do appreciate you taking the time to reaching out to me with issues that are important to you. Please keep me in mind if I may be of assistance to you on state issues in the future. Sincerely, Phil Cavanagh State Representative 10th District
Thank you for contacting regarding updating the Elliot-Larsen Civil Rights Act to protect Michiganders against discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. Michigan’s business economy has been involved in a global war for talent for years, looking for the brightest workforce to compete in our 21st century economy regardless of sexual orientation and gender identity. This was a topic of conversation amongst business leaders at the Detroit Regional Chamber Mackinac Policy Conference in May and have been advocating for a change in the state’s civil rights law. Sixty-five percent of residents support making Michigan an equal opportunity state and that percentage goes up even higher among younger residents. Our state’s economic health depends on the ability of Michigan’s cities to be competitive in attracting both job creators and those seeking employment. September 10, 2014, bills were introduced in the House and Senate to amend the Elliot-Larsen Civil Rights Act to include sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression. Discrimination in any form is wrong and these bills would provide immediate protections for people. I am in support for updating the Elliot-Larsen Civil Rights Act but there are many different versions and amendments proposed, so I have to see what is presented for a vote. I do appreciate you taking the time to reaching out to me with issues that are important to you. Please keep me in mind if I may be of assistance to you on state issues in the future. Sincerely, Phil Cavanagh State Representative 10th District

Thank you for your interest in SB 285 and SB 286 regarding treatment of animals and increase penalties for animal cruelty, abuse and neglect. The current penalties for crimes against animals can fall far short in egregious cases. Michigan law should include enhanced penalties for offenses that involve large numbers of animals, companion animals, intentional abuse, psychological trauma to a pet owner, and repeat offenders, as well as pet shop owners or breeders with multiple violations of the pet shop law. Currently, the most severe penalty for animal neglect or cruelty applies to cases involving 10 or more animals, or two or more prior offenses. Crimes involving the killing or torturing of animals are not distinguished based on whether the animal was someone's pet, or whether the offender intentionally committed the act or intended to cause someone mental distress or to control a person. The bills would factor in these circumstances, and adjust penalties accordingly. Also, Senate Bill 286 would include enhanced sentencing scoring for acts intended to manipulate, or cause psychological injury to, a victim. In cases of domestic abuse and child abuse, abusers may control victims through threats and violence against family pets, which can cause psychological harm to the pet owner. The bills could make it easier for law enforcement to target and isolate individuals, such as murderers, domestic abusers, and other violent offenders, who pose a danger to society. Many studies and reports suggest that animal abusers are likely to commit other violent crimes. Ultimately, by establishing harsher penalties for crimes against animals, the bills could help prevent violent crimes against individuals. These bills were referred to the committee on criminal justice, of which I’m not a member. I am hopeful they will come before the house for a vote. Being a pet owner myself, I am in support of SB 285 and SB 286. We must always look out for our furry friends. Sincerely, Phil Cavanagh
Thank you for your interest in SB 285 and SB 286 regarding treatment of animals and increase penalties for animal cruelty, abuse and neglect. The current penalties for crimes against animals can fall far short in egregious cases. Michigan law should include enhanced penalties for offenses that involve large numbers of animals, companion animals, intentional abuse, psychological trauma to a pet owner, and repeat offenders, as well as pet shop owners or breeders with multiple violations of the pet shop law. Currently, the most severe penalty for animal neglect or cruelty applies to cases involving 10 or more animals, or two or more prior offenses. Crimes involving the killing or torturing of animals are not distinguished based on whether the animal was someone's pet, or whether the offender intentionally committed the act or intended to cause someone mental distress or to control a person. The bills would factor in these circumstances, and adjust penalties accordingly. Also, Senate Bill 286 would include enhanced sentencing scoring for acts intended to manipulate, or cause psychological injury to, a victim. In cases of domestic abuse and child abuse, abusers may control victims through threats and violence against family pets, which can cause psychological harm to the pet owner. The bills could make it easier for law enforcement to target and isolate individuals, such as murderers, domestic abusers, and other violent offenders, who pose a danger to society. Many studies and reports suggest that animal abusers are likely to commit other violent crimes. Ultimately, by establishing harsher penalties for crimes against animals, the bills could help prevent violent crimes against individuals. These bills were referred to the committee on criminal justice, of which I’m not a member. I am hopeful they will come before the house for a vote. Being a pet owner myself, I am in support of SB 285 and SB 286. We must always look out for our furry friends. Sincerely, Phil Cavanagh

Thank you for contacting me through Change.org asking for justice for Rock. I did see the news story on WDIV and my heart went out to Rocks owners, Bianca Alakson and Ryan Showalter. It has grown increasingly common for police officers to use deadly force when dealing with animals. It is an unfortunate that police officers are viewing dogs as a threat first, instead of as a family member of the home they are entering. As the owner of two large breed dogs which are very friendly, but can be perceived as dangerous, I would be distraught if they were a causality of a police officer. As a state representative and dog owner I would support legislation that would provide for: • Improved training to officers about non-lethal options for handling dogs and understanding dog behavior • Use alternative equipment such as catch-poles, nets and batons. • Establish clear departmental procedures with a scale of options to exhaust before discharging a weapon-procedure that reduce or eliminate the automatic shooting of an animal as a response to tense situations. • Provide training at the police academy to new officers on all non-lethal options accessing canine behavior and dealing with pets while on duty. Thank you again for contacting me through Change.org. If there is anything I can be of assistance on regarding state issues please don’t hesitate to contact my office. Sincerely, Phil Cavanagh State Representative 10th District
Thank you for contacting me through Change.org asking for justice for Rock. I did see the news story on WDIV and my heart went out to Rocks owners, Bianca Alakson and Ryan Showalter. It has grown increasingly common for police officers to use deadly force when dealing with animals. It is an unfortunate that police officers are viewing dogs as a threat first, instead of as a family member of the home they are entering. As the owner of two large breed dogs which are very friendly, but can be perceived as dangerous, I would be distraught if they were a causality of a police officer. As a state representative and dog owner I would support legislation that would provide for: • Improved training to officers about non-lethal options for handling dogs and understanding dog behavior • Use alternative equipment such as catch-poles, nets and batons. • Establish clear departmental procedures with a scale of options to exhaust before discharging a weapon-procedure that reduce or eliminate the automatic shooting of an animal as a response to tense situations. • Provide training at the police academy to new officers on all non-lethal options accessing canine behavior and dealing with pets while on duty. Thank you again for contacting me through Change.org. If there is anything I can be of assistance on regarding state issues please don’t hesitate to contact my office. Sincerely, Phil Cavanagh State Representative 10th District