gunny
April 1st, 2005, 12:49 AM
Seems as though the Limousine Association of New Jersey is a little upset of a proposed state law that would create a "Black Car" type category. The law will lower insurance minimums down to $300,000 vice the 1.5 mil now required supposedly with the blessings of the LANJ. Of course, seeing that many NJ operators are engaged in interstate transportation the minimum is required under federal law. The Black Car services with the new minimum would be prohibited from such interstate transfers. The article this info was taken from is in Aprils LCT issue. Anyone from Jersey with more info on this?
I'm holding my tongue regarding the true gist of the authors message.
April Fools! I'm not going to hold my tongue. This is another prime example of a "Big Shot" in an association twisting facts to convince individuals of the point he is trying to make. The author , a board member of the LANJ throws out this could create a hazard for corporate travelers. That "unscrupulous" operators will abandon stretches and run only sedans at a fraction of operating cost for a "God Forbid" higher profit percentage (my interpretation). Unfortunately for the author his commentary appears after an article of how Jersey operators "suffered" 50 - 100% insurance rate increases 3 years in a row. I wonder what really worries the author. The danger to the corporate traveler or the increased competition?
Bottom line is, it's not easy to convince politicians to turn an idea into a bill and subsequently turn it into law. Persons with more influence than this association made it happen for a reason. The LANJ should explore the reasons & their shortcomings that made this possible.
I'm holding my tongue regarding the true gist of the authors message.
April Fools! I'm not going to hold my tongue. This is another prime example of a "Big Shot" in an association twisting facts to convince individuals of the point he is trying to make. The author , a board member of the LANJ throws out this could create a hazard for corporate travelers. That "unscrupulous" operators will abandon stretches and run only sedans at a fraction of operating cost for a "God Forbid" higher profit percentage (my interpretation). Unfortunately for the author his commentary appears after an article of how Jersey operators "suffered" 50 - 100% insurance rate increases 3 years in a row. I wonder what really worries the author. The danger to the corporate traveler or the increased competition?
Bottom line is, it's not easy to convince politicians to turn an idea into a bill and subsequently turn it into law. Persons with more influence than this association made it happen for a reason. The LANJ should explore the reasons & their shortcomings that made this possible.