Melvin B. Miller
Editor & Publisher

Abiding by the law

Competent judges base their opinions on the laws which are relevant to the facts. On the other hand, government officials often place greater weight on political considerations which they euphemistically describe as pressing needs.

When Nonnie S. Burnes left the bench to become commissioner of the state Division of Insurance, she brought with her the practice of relying on the law. This propensity made it extremely difficult for her to continue the existing system for setting auto insurance rates.

Under the law, the commissioner has the authority to set insurance rates only when the market mechanism is flawed. This occurred in 1977, when rates were too high to be generally affordable. The insurance commissioner then stepped in and, after hearings, established the legal rates.

As might be expected, a number of insurance companies with strategies that depended upon competition in a free market withdrew. In the past 17 years, 35 companies have left Massachusetts.

The remaining companies have apparently been able to lower rates on their own, which suggests that the market imbalance has been corrected.

Under such circumstances, the commissioner no longer has the legal authority to impose rates. Commissioner Burnes has acknowledged this change. She cannot legally be restrained from following the law by unsupported assertions that a bad result is inevitable.

It is refreshing to see the rule of law determine public policy. Those who oppose Commissioner Burnes’ innovation remain free to protest if the policy should fail.

Egregious injustice

African Americans rarely take notice of even the most egregious miscarriage of justice if no blacks are involved. That attitude is exceedingly shortsighted. The baleful history of blacks in America should have established a profound awareness that civil rights are difficult to attain and are also challenging to retain once acquired.

The bedrock of civil rights is the national commitment to the primacy of the rule of law. Civil rights do not depend, as some believe, on cordial interracial relationships. The most important element is the law that provides an aggrieved individual recourse in the event of racial bigotry.

Commitment to the rule of law is an enlightened societal value and is difficult to maintain. Those with power are often willing to deviate from this principle to achieve their goals. The civil rights leadership and others should be prepared to oppose any serious deviation, regardless of racial or ethnic considerations.

One of the most egregious cases of official misconduct in a criminal case is the refusal of the Federal Bureau of Investigation to disclose to Massachusetts prosecutors that the testimony of Joseph Barboza in the Edward Deegan murder was perjured.

Barboza falsely implicated Henry Tameleo, Louis Greco, Joseph Salvati and Peter Limone in the murder. All were sent to prison in 1968. Tameleo and Greco died in prison after serving 18 and 28 years, respectively. Salvati served nearly 30 years and Limone served 33 before being released from prison after FBI reports indicating the bureau’s knowledge of the frame-up were disclosed.

U.S. District Judge Nancy Gertner awarded a $101.7 million judgment against the United States for the intentional misconduct of the FBI. Civil rights activists should be very concerned about the conduct of the FBI. As Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. said, “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.”

“As much as I pay for insurance, the company should
be on the title.”