In South Carolina in 2025, Big Insurance Corporations have launched an unprecedented effort to make it harder for individual consumers to recover from their insurance companies when bad things happen to them. Conservatives need to stand up and call their legislators to make their voices heard.
In South Carolina in 2025, Big Insurance Corporations have launched an unprecedented effort to make it harder for individual consumers to recover from their insurance companies when bad things happen to them. Conservatives need to stand up and call their legislators to make their voices heard.
Every time premiums go up, we hear the same pitch: limit lawsuits, cap damages, cut what Big Insurance has to pay — and costs will come down. In South Carolina, that argument gets packaged as so-called “tort reform” and sold as a common-sense solution to rising costs. Before we accept that premise, we should review recent news by looking at what happened in a state that already tried it: Michigan.
In 2019, Michigan overhauled its auto coverage system, promising drivers relief from some of the highest costs in the country. But instead of regulating prices or requiring Big Insurance to justify rate increases, the “reform” focused on reducing what Big Insurance is required to pay after serious crashes. The law eliminated guaranteed lifetime medical coverage for most drivers, capped payments for medical and attendant care, and allowed coverage to run out even for people with catastrophic injuries. The expectation was simple: if Big Insurance paid less, drivers would pay less too.
That’s not what happened.
According to reporting by Michigan Public, an independent analysis of the law found that average auto premiums were actually higher in 2024 than before the reform took effect in 2019. The article, “Michigan officials insist 2019 auto no-fault law lowered car insurance rates. It didn’t,” explains how state officials highlighted modeled savings in one narrow part of coverage, while total costs continued to rise for drivers in the real world.
The same reporting shows that while regulators claimed the law reduced the number of uninsured drivers, the data indicate the uninsured rate actually increased — even if the gap between Michigan and the national average narrowed. In short, the promised affordability gains never materialized for most drivers.
The problem is structural. Big Insurance is not required to permanently pass savings on to consumers. Even when one part of a policy becomes cheaper, Big Insurance can raise other components, add fees, or change pricing practices. As a result, drivers can end up paying more overall — even while receiving less protection after a crash.
That’s exactly what Michigan drivers are experiencing today.
When coverage runs out or care is no longer available, the costs don’t disappear. They shift. Families are forced into unpaid caregiving roles. Injured people are pushed onto Medicaid or other public programs. Taxpayers and communities absorb the financial and human toll. That’s not efficiency — it’s cost shifting.
This pattern isn’t limited to Michigan. Across the country, Big Insurance has become increasingly aggressive about denying claims. According to Weiss Ratings, an independent research firm, fourteen large U.S. property carriers closed between 40% and 51% of homeowner claims without paying anything in 2024. Weiss described these denial rates as historically abnormal and deeply concerning for consumers.
Major newspapers have reported similar trends. In Texas, the Houston Chronicle found that nearly half of home claims were closed without payment in 2024 — raising serious questions about whether policies function as real protection or simply as mandatory paperwork.
South Carolina already faces high costs, high crash rates, and deep disparities in who pays the most. The idea that weakening accountability through so-called “tort reform” will solve these problems is appealing in theory — but the evidence suggests otherwise. Limiting legal rights does not regulate premiums. It does not guarantee savings. And it does not make Big Insurance work better when people need help the most.
Coverage is something South Carolinians are required by law to buy. Fairness and accountability should not be optional. Michigan’s experience shows that cutting rights after a crash doesn’t lower costs — it simply shifts risk away from Big Insurance and onto families and taxpayers.
Real reform means transparency in pricing, meaningful oversight of claims practices, and coverage that actually delivers on its promise. South Carolina drivers deserve nothing less.
by Reform Insurance Now SC