ROANOKE TIMES

                         Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: THURSDAY, December 16, 1993                   TAG: 9312160049
SECTION: VIRGINIA                    PAGE: C-1   EDITION: METRO 
SOURCE: Ray Reed
DATELINE:                                 LENGTH: Medium


CAR INSURANCE TO COST LESS?

Q: Under the Clinton health plan, what would happen to the medical expense part of my automobile insurance bill? Is that folded into the regional health establishment, and would my car insurance cost go down? B.R.H., Fincastle

A: The Clinton plan calls for people injured in auto accidents to be treated by their own health plan. The auto insurance company would be billed for the treatment, says the Insurance Information Institute.

Would your bill go down? Possibly, but don't spend the money just yet.

Casualty insurance companies expect their costs would go down, because treatment would be done without a buildup of extra tests and X-rays that insurors say are typical of personal-injury cases.

The insurance industry hasn't said whether the customer can expect a reduced bill. By the time the Clinton package is approved and in place, inflation or new costs could overtake the savings.

Pension rules changed

Q: I began a Civil Service job in 1955 and was told I had a contract that if I paid into a retirement plan, the U.S. government would return the money to me and not withhold taxes - because my pay already had been taxed.

Congress changed the law in 1988; now, for every dollar I receive, I must pay taxes on 85 cents, which is double taxation.

I went to Rep. Jim Olin about this, and he seemed to think it was no big deal; he helped sponsor the legislation. I'd like to know whether Olin and the other congressmen who retired since 1988 are having to pay double taxes also. L.R., Eagle Rock

A: Yes, they are.

Representatives who paid into the Civil Service Retirement System put in after-tax dollars. When they receive benefits now, they're subject to tax again, like most everyone else's pension checks.

That information's from a 1991 report by the Congressional Research Service.

Tobacco no factor

Q: Would George Allen have been elected governor if the newspaper article about his chewing tobacco had appeared before the election? That makes me think tobacco people might have had something to do with his election, or that he may have been trying to hide it. D.S., Roanoke

A: This newspaper did report in a front-page story Oct. 24 that Allen chewed tobacco, a habit he picked up from Los Angeles Rams players while his father was their coach.

The chewing thing also was reported back in April, but old habits usually aren't news.

His tobacco use couldn't be hidden; it was an up-front part of his persona - an easy-going manner, cowboy boots and all, that clicked with voters.

Tobacco companies had little to do with Allen's election - unless they acted behind the scenes. Maybe they thought his using wasn't good P.R. Or maybe wads of tobacco money aren't politically correct on a campaign finance report.

At any rate, an eyeball check of 330 pages listing Allen's contributions through Oct. 22 found just $3,650 in gifts from six individuals or companies that were readily identified as tobacco interests.

By that time, Allen had the election won. Final figures don't have to be reported until Jan. 15.

Got a question about something that might affect other people, too? Something you've come across and wondered about? Give us a call at 981-3118. Maybe we can find the answer.



 by CNB