Apart from objecting to the content in the bill package, insurer representatives took issue with the speed in which the bills passed through the House. The package was introduced Dec. 1 and passed through the Committee on Insurance just two days later, Ms. Collins noted.

Ann Weber, vice president of state government relations for the Property Casualty Insurers Association of America (PCI), also commented on how fast the House acted, stating, "That's not a good way to develop public policy."

Some public officials in the state, including Insurance Consumer Advocate Melvin "Butch" Hollowell, contend that rates in the state need to be more affordable and have criticized rating factors such as credit, education and occupation.

Insurer associations argue that high rates in the state stem from generous benefits associated with Michigan's no-fault coverage.

Ms. Weber called Michigan's system the "Cadillac of no-fault," and said insurers need to charge premiums accordingly.

Ms. Collins said she expects the Senate to take a "longer process" next year to look at insurance in the state.

Both Ms. Collins and Ms. Weber were more optimistic that the Senate would take more time to consider options than the House did.

Ms. Weber said the industry should have an opportunity to fully vet proposals in the Senate. She added the Senate is "appreciative of how the insurance industry contributes to the economy in Michigan" as a stable provider of jobs, and is more willing to work with the industry than the House.