Having served its purpose, the committee will now dissolve in accordance with the NCOIL bylaws. However, the AI and Transparency Resolutions will refer certain questions to the NCOIL Standing Political Committees for further consideration.
The AI resolution states that while NCOIL believes that the use of AI will outperform the use of individual factors in insurance insurance, NCOIL should conduct a review of the use of AI in insurance testing to ensure that it is not is unfairly discriminatory.
The transparency decision states that consumers, policymakers, insurance producers and the insurance industry would benefit from additional transparency in the development and use of insurance scores. The resolution refers the issue to the NCOIL Property and Casualty Insurance Committee in order to develop model legislation on the transparency of insurance valuation.
Read on: NCOIL is developing a model to protect public liability
The Rating Factors resolution states that NCOIL regards the use of certain data in taking out personal and non-commercial insurance as a breach of public order and unfairly discriminatory – especially data related to pending arrests, indictments and indictments that are inconclusive result in a conviction and convictions that are in no way related to fraud or to the insurability of a prospective or existing policyholder. NCOIL urged state legislatures to ban the use of such data in insurance auditing.
The resolution on rating factors also stated that NCOIL did not consider additional factors used in taking out private, non-commercial insurance policies to be unfairly discriminatory on their own, but that some factors could be discriminatory in their application. NCOIL recognized that state lawmakers may conclude that such assessment factors should be banned or restricted. The resolution also recommended that states conduct annual reviews of the fairness of the drawing.
“I am honored to have chaired this very important committee and I am proud of the work we have done,” said Breslin. “Since our inception, we have heard from a variety of speakers, all of whom were very knowledgeable and had different opinions and points of view. Hearing such a diverse group of experts enabled the committee to achieve the best possible result. “