🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Mar18.010825.7308@eng.umd.edu>, hsu@eng.umd.edu (Dagwood
splits the Atom) writes:
|> 
|> Although GEICO _may_ offer you a lower rate, the politically aware
|> might like to know that it was GEICO that tried to deny insurance to
|> drivers who owned radar-detectors (until the Maryland Insurance
|> Commission stopped them) and among the insurance companies, it
|> continues to be GEICO which most strongly opposes any legislation to
|> raise the speed limit over 55mph.  We _almost_ had 65 in rural parts
|> of Maryland last year, passing the House Subcommitte, and then the
|> full House and Senate, but last minute lobbying by GEICO persuaded
|> Gov. Shaefer to veto the bill.  They're not going to spend any of
|> _my_ money on that.
|> 

They're welcome to spend _my_ money on that.  Keeping the limit at 55
mph saves gas, keeps pollution (including greenhouse gases) lower, and
saves my money by keeping accident rates lower, thereby keeping
insurance claims and thus premiums lower.  Oh, yeah - it save lives,
too.

Banning radar detectors would help to enforce the lower limit,
obviously.

--
Karl A. Anderson		| Internet: karl@thuja.gsfc.nasa.gov
NASA/GSFC code 920.2 (STX)	| voice: (301) 286-3815
Greenbelt, MD 20771		| #include "std_disclaimer"