In defense of Nader

[Wojtek Sokolowski]

At 05:29 PM 1/21/00 -0500, Nathan Newman wrote:
>Tobias has been a big supporter of no-fault insurance and has proposed a very
>good, environmentally-conscious plan to fund no-fault auto insurance
through a
>gas tax.  The more you drive, the more you pay -- with tax rebates for good
>drivers and cheaper cars.  One of the problems with car insurance is that
once
>you pay your monthly premium, each marginal mile is not that expensive so it
>often beats the cost of mass transit (if you have to drive a car at all in a
>month).  With Tobias's plan, gas for every mile of driving would be more
>expensive (even if the total cost was the same for the average driver).  This
>would make mass transit much more competitive per trip and would encourage a
>decrease in driving miles in favor of mass transit.
>
>Nader has fought no-fault everywhere, including Tobias's plan, because he
>believes in the right to sue.  His love of lawsuits as the best way to manage
>social regulation is one of Nader's worst points.  There are some concerns
about
>no-fault but Nader's opposition to Tobias's plan seems like a betrayal of
>environmental principles in favor of his loyalty to trial lawyer ideology.

Interesting.  I would think that the Tobias plan is opposed mainly by
insurance companies because gasoline tax is a defacto public insurance
scheme that would force them out of business.  In the current situation,
they can profit be cherry-picking good drivers while leaving the bad ones
out.  If the Tobias plan were enacted, their role would be at best limited
to processing fees and handling claims, or altogether eliminated since
these transactions can be carried our by departments of motor vehicles.

So the fact that nader is on the same side of the barricade on this issue
is very interesting, indeed.  Are you sure that it is just loyalty to
"trial lawyer ideology" and not to insurance business?

wojtek