Stephen J. Carroll

The Frequency of Excess Claims for Automobile Personal Injuries

Over the past decade and a half, automobile insurance premiums, particularly for personal injury coverages, have grown rapidly across the country. Stiff increases in insurance premiums are burdensome for everyone1. Forty-nine percent of the respondents to a recent national survey thought the affordability of auto insurance was a problem2. High insurance premiums are especially problematic for low-income populations. One study found that less affluent motorists are now spending over thirty percent of their annual household incomes on automobile insurance3. Moreover, high insurance premiums are an incentive to drive uninsured, thus exacerbating the uninsured motorist problem.

Punitive Damages in Financial Injury Jury Verdicts

Studies of civil jury verdicts have been a prominent feature of the Institute for Civil Justices research agenda since its inception. This work has included the creation of a database for the analysis of jury verdicts and descriptive and analytic studies of verdict trends. Our current research extends our jury verdict work in two significant directions: First, it provides additional detail about punitive damage awards in cases in our existing database in which the plaintiff complains of financial injuries—cases in which punitive damages are awarded relatively more frequently than in other types of cases. Second, the database has been extended to include verdicts reached in Alabama from 1992 to 1997.

The Effects of Choice Auto Insurance on Costs and Compensation

In 1999, bills that would establish a choice auto insurance plan in all states were introduced in both the U.S. Senate (S. 837) and the U.S. House of Representatives (H.R. 1475). These bills would establish an auto insurance plan in every state under which consumers are given a choice between a modified version of their state’s current insurance system (MCS) and an absolute no-fault (ANF) plan.’ This analysis uses data for a representative sample of auto accident victims whose claims were closed in 1997 to estimate the effects of a choice automobile insurance plan that embodies the basic principles of the plans being considered in Congress. However, because of data limitations, we do not consider certain provisions of those plans. These are noted below.

Estimating The Effects of “No-Pay, No-Play” Auto Insurance Plans on the Costs of Auto Insurance: The Effects Of Proposition 213

“No pay, no play” auto insurance plans have become the focus of widespread policy debate. Four states — California, Louisiana, Michigan, and New Jersey — have enacted laws restricting compensation to uninsured motorists. Legislation that would limit uninsured motorists’ rights to recovery for losses resulting from automobile accidents was introduced in at least 13 other states during 1997. The issue will almost certainly be revisited many of the states that considered, but did not adopt, some form of no pay, no play in 1997. It is equally likely that limits on uninsured motorists’ compensation will be the topic of future debates in many of the states that have not yet addressed the issue.

Toward a national youth employment policy: Mapping the route from problems to programs

The United States has not had a consistent, comprehensive youth employment policy. Program objectives are not clear and are often in conflict with the objectives of other programs aimed at the same target population. The primary needs at this juncture are a clearly specified policy objective and a method for identifying the ways in which potential interventions can help attain that objective.The authors argue that the genesis of public concern with youth employment problems lies in the general acceptance of greater equality of opportunity as a national goal. The appropriate objective of youth employment policy is conceptualized as the reduction of certain inequalities in economic opportunity that confront the young.Equality of economic opportunity is a long-run concept. The relations between actions at a point in time and opportunity over time are developed within a model of youth behavior. The analysis focuses on the notions of career paths, employment success, and economic oportunity.