Wave a few dollars in savings and it's often easy to understand
why opposition to proposed legislation falls away.  That is the
possibility with a mid-April proposal to make broad changes to
the state's no-fault insurance system. The legislation also
would deter medical costs from being elevated for injuries
suffered in motor vehicle accidents and place measures to
prevent insurance fraud.  The funny thing is that shouldn't be
the end of the discussion. There needs to be more open dialogue,
listing the pros and cons of such a move. We can all use a
little savings when it comes to car insurance, much as we may
wish milk, gasoline and cable service were less costly.  The
repercussions for not getting groceries, fuel and television are
clear.  Not having no-fault insurance? Less so.  The most
obvious argument is the proposal's limitation of $1 million in
coverage -- removing the unlimited designation -- could leave
those who suffer significant injuries in accidents left to waste
away physically and financially.