NLIC.org

Herman Said:

Is seperate insurance for minors nessacary on cars a parent already has insured?

We Answered:

Your dad has been lucky that none of his kids has had an accident. When there's a new driver, the company is entitled to the extra premium for the increased risk; failure to add the driver could possibly void coverage after an accident.

Dad doesn't need to take out a new policy for a new driver, but he does need to add the new driver. If there is more than one new driver, the policy will be rated for the most expensive driver.

Minnie Said:

Can you purchase car insurance w/out owning a vehicle?

We Answered:

Remember, car insurance insures the car, not the driver. With that said, most policies will extend coverage to those drivers covered by the policy when they rent a vehicle.

Read your policy carefully to see if you are covered. I suspect not, since this extension of coverage to rentals applies only for the primary driver(s), e.g. husband/wife/parents and not children/offspring.

So your only bet is to accept the waiver(what people call insurance) from the rental company. Also, keep in mind some specialty insurance policies, like traveler's insurance may cover you if your renting the car for vacation purposes, but you'll have to ask around.

Hazel Said:

Isn't it unconstitutional to require Americans to buy health insurance?

We Answered:

Interesting question and one a lot of folks are asking.

Timothy Jost, a professor of Washington and Lee University School of Law who says he prefers a national public plan, has argued the constitutional principles -- saying in a Politico.com essay that the question was a Republican "talking point" that shouldn't be taken terribly seriously. "A basic principle of our constitutional system for the last two centuries has been that the Supreme Court is the ultimate authority on the Constitution, and the Constitution the court now recognizes would permit Congress to adopt health care reform," Jost wrote.

Probably the most extensive, or at least heavily-footnoted, argument in favor of the proposal's constitutionality comes from Mark Hall, a law professor at Wake Forest University. In a 27-page paper prepared for Georgetown University's O'Neill Institute, Hall acknowledges that the federal government "has limited powers" and a law requiring Americans to "transfer money to a private party for health or economic purposes seems to be unprecedented" because laws tend to prohibit such purchases rather than mandate them.

But after walking through the arguments, Hall concludes that there are no legal objections likely to be sustained by the current Supreme Court: "Either state or federal government may require either individuals or employers to pay for health insurance. States have inherent power to promote health and provide for the general welfare. The federal government has authority under its power to regulate interstate commerce... These major points of constitutional law appear to be firmly established and are not likely to change based on the near-term composition of the Court."

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/09/21/…

Bill Said:

Are States legally allowed to require car insurance?

We Answered:

Without mandatory liability insurance, my rates would skyrocket. I would have to increase my own premiums in order to be sure I was covered in the event I was struck by someone who needed to buy smokes instead of make a car insurance payment.

Cars are not a necessity, they don''t need to make concessions for low income families, cable TV doesn't either.

I won't argue with, but would like to see where you got the percentages of claims paid.