Texas helmet law proof of motorcycle medical insurance.

[dentheman]

Texas has recently passed a law that requires a motorcycle operator and passenger to have a proof of medical insurance card that states motorcycle accidents are covered by the insurer, if the operator or passenger are not wearing a helmet. I just read a working paper by the TX Department of Insurance that specifies the layout of that proof of insurance card, it is quite specific, even including the pitch of the lettering the insurer must use to print such a card. I am working with the TX DPS Motorcycle Division and the TX Department of Insurance to get an exemption from this requirement for military and military retirees since we are insured for any accidents (including motorcyle) by the military medical systm or Tri-Care (in the case of retirees, such as me). Our proof of insurance is our military ID cards, which do not meet the TX requirement for a 'proof of insurance' cards that they are proposing.

Do other states have such a proof of motorcycle health coverage requirement to delineate whether a person must or need not wear a helmet?

[alanmcorcoran]

Never heard of motorcycle accidents being excluded, but, I guess anything is possible. We have a mandatory helmet law and mandatory insurance coverage (although, not necessarily medical) anyway so it wouldn't make as much sense here.

Will they be requiring insurance for eating the KFC Double down or watching TV eight hours a day? I understand heart attacks, diabetes and obesity can be expensive to treat as well.

I'm not up on the fine details of the national heath care legislation, but it seems like it would preclude exclusions for specific types of accidents. Are there exclusions for skydiving or skiing or bicycle riding?

[dentheman]

Apparently there must be some medical insurance companies that exclude people who aren't wearing helmets, otherwise why such a law? I am afraid that companies who don't exclude motorcycles may start doing so since this requirement could become a pain for them to comply with. My Tri-Care has no exclusions.

[burkbuilds]

You might want to check again on your Tri-Care, my son-in-law is in the Army and a few weeks ago they made the point of telling them that if they were in a motorcycle accident and were not wearing a helmet, AND, a leather jacket or some type of armored jacket, that the army was not going to pay those medical expenses.

[dentheman]

You might want to check again on your Tri-Care, my son-in-law is in the Army and a few weeks ago they made the point of telling them that if they were in a motorcycle accident and were not wearing a helmet, AND, a leather jacket or some type of armored jacket, that the army was not going to pay those medical expenses.
I just talked to a Tri-Care rep about a week ago and there are no exclusions (yet). It may be different for active duty. But I probably need to check into it again. Tri-Care is administered by Humana rather than directly by the military.

[dentheman]

You might want to check again on your Tri-Care, my son-in-law is in the Army and a few weeks ago they made the point of telling them that if they were in a motorcycle accident and were not wearing a helmet, AND, a leather jacket or some type of armored jacket, that the army was not going to pay those medical expenses.
I did call Tri-Care, they said they would pay as secondary insurance to pick up what the automobile (motorcycle) collision insurance company didn't pay. BUT THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT FOR HELMET, ARMORED JACKET, ETC, if state law doesn't require it. So I called a couple motorcycle (collision) insurance companies, and found they have no specific requirements except what state law requires. So, my take is I would be covered as long as I complied with state law. Your brother in law may be in a state that has different protective gear law requirements. As far as the Army telling him he would not be covered, I would take that with a grain of salt. Many, many years ago the Air Force required a 4 square inch white reflective tape on the back of motorcycle helmets until it was challenged, now they go by state law requirements.

[patrick_777]

Umm....source?

[dentheman]

Umm....source?
I started here: > http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/msb/helmet.htm< Since then I made some calls and sent some emails to both the TX DPS Motorcycle Division and TX Dept of Insurance requesting clarification concerning military ID cards. The Dept of Ins has been sending me pdf. files of their working papers for this proof of insurance. They will be meeting April 30 in Austin to thrash out the details. The deeper I get into this, the deeper it gets. I'm not sure the law will be enforceable, except after the fact of an accident or some other infraction.

[dentheman]

trying to add pdf file.[attachment=0:34cplu5z]Motorcycle Hlth ID Card - Inf Rule 04-15-10 (3).pdf[/attachment:34cplu5z]

[bonehead]

When I was active duty, if you rode a bike you had to at least wear a helmet at all times no matter the state law. It was was an air force regulation. And that was on or off base.

[music man]

When I was active duty, if you rode a bike you had to at least wear a helmet at all times no matter the state law. It was was an air force regulation. And that was on or off base.


My nephew is in the Army and I am pretty sure when I sold him my bike, he told me the same thing, that he had to wear a helmet at all times.

[dentheman]

I stand corrected. Being retired I guess I am not that up on all the military regs as I was, for active duty. I can understand requiring helmets, but armored jackets seems a bit much. I do remember that years ago military motorcyclists at Reese AFB would stop once off-base to remove their helmets before continuing to town.

[bonehead]

I stand corrected. Being retired I guess I am not that up on all the military regs as I was, for active duty. I can understand requiring helmets, but armored jackets seems a bit much. I do remember that years ago military motorcyclists at Reese AFB would stop once off-base to remove their helmets before continuing to town.
Know B/Gen Richard Hearne?

[dentheman]

I stand corrected. Being retired I guess I am not that up on all the military regs as I was, for active duty. I can understand requiring helmets, but armored jackets seems a bit much. I do remember that years ago military motorcyclists at Reese AFB would stop once off-base to remove their helmets before continuing to town.
Know B/Gen Richard Hearne?
I know of him, but I was stationed elsewhere when he was Commander at Reese.

[bonehead]

Small world. Family friends for 45+ years.

[magnum44270]

active duty airforce currently has to wear
1 . approved DOT helmet
2. eye protection (glasses, helmet face shield)
3. long sleves
4. reflective vest
5. gloves
6. pants
7. boots

[magnum44270]

that is on and off base............ and anyone comming onto the base on a motorcycle has to have the same. no matter what status (active, retired, civ)

[dentheman]

Maybe I got a little too involved including active duty and on-base riding since I am retired and live about 150 miles from the nearest base.

So, to restate my case: I will be riding on Texas roads with health insurance that covers me when riding a motorcycle even without wearing a helmet (according to Tri-Care they follow state law for retirees). The point is, Texas is requiring a special proof of MOTORCYCLE health insurance when Tri-Care doesn't issue any kind of 'proof of insurance' card to retirees. My military retiree ID card serves the purpose of the proof of health insurance, but it doesn't state anywhere that it is proof of health insurance, and certainly doesn't state it is proof of MOTORCYCLE health insurance.

By the way, I will wear a helmet, I just think this Texas law is silly, and unenforceable. Law enforcement cannot stop a motorcycle to check if the driver or passenger have motorcycle health insurance cards. It can only be done if stopped for some other reason. The old system of having a 'no helmet' sticker on the license plate made more sense.

[music man]

By the way, I will wear a helmet, I just think this Texas law is silly, and unenforceable. Law enforcement cannot stop a motorcycle to check if the driver or passenger have motorcycle health insurance cards. It can only be done if stopped for some other reason.


I wouldn't bet on that, they just past a law here in Arkansas (and other states as well I believe) that says that you can be wrote a ticket for smoking a cigarette in your vehicle if you have a child under 6 years old in your car. They are going to be stopping people that they see over the next few months to "warn" them that they will be wrote a ticket next time they get caught. So that means they are just going to be pulling over people for smoking in their car, and to verify how old there kids are? So stopping you to see if you have a motorcycle health insurance card is not that much of a stretch.


These are all just ploys the police use to have "probable cause" to pull you over anytime day or night. Just like when they past the law that they have to ask you to search your vehicle, but if you say no, that in itself is "probable cause" for them to legally search it, because only someone hiding something would refuse to let a cop pilfer through their personal property right?

[dentheman]

The law specifically states a stop cannot be made to check for this insurance. But if stopped for some other reason then it can be checked. I'll just have to wait and see how that works.