Paulson Blueprint Promotes Insurance Industry Shell Game
It is somewhat strange in the report on the regulation of financial markets, which will be held from March 31 Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson. The plan that has made some major strengthening of federal control on the capital markets and rejected by others as a simple rearrangement of deck chairs on the Titanic financier, includes a section unsuitable for the insurance industry.
While insurance is a financial services provider, it was not included in the center of the implosion of the housing market, or (with the exception of the deposit insurance crisis), in conjunction with the volatility on Wall Street. The Paulson, yet an overwhelming majority the agreement offers a “reform” that the major players in the insurance market, which have at least 15 years, major national airlines to do a piece on the current state of insurance regulators. This institution would be permitted, the adoption of a “charter of the Confederation option,” and therefore themselves, under the supervision of the Confederation, the regulatory authority, which does not yet exist.
Big insurance did not attempt to monitor the Confederation because it wants more regulation. Indeed, what is the pioneer in the industry, outsourcing, while some airlines its official headquarters to tax havens like Bermuda. While many regulatory authorities of state were toothless watchdogs, other states have been aggressive in protecting the interests of policyholders and the public.
In fact, Paulson’s proposal comes just a few weeks after the insurer was celebrated, and the sinking of New York, Eliot Spitzer Gov in a prostitution scandal. During his tenure in New York as Attorney General Spitzer large insurance companies, such as Marsh & McLennan and American International Group for offences such as bid rigging. Marsh ended up for the settlement of $ 850 million in 2005, and AIG pay a colossal $ 1.6 billion for the following year. It is true that Spitzer went to the industry as Attorney General is not as a regulator, he did this in the overall context of the state.
The insurance industry swears that he supported the Optional Federal Charter, in the name of modernization (as well as the report Paulson), but it is significant that the reform has been supported by groups such as the Competitive Enterprise Institute and ‘American Enterprise Institute, who are not friends Du Regulation (some Democrats in Congress are also at the mercy). If word Paulson’s insurance proposal on the weekend, the American Insurance Association rushed in a press release from saying that the federal charter option “is more effective, more efficient and more effective in view of the escalating Tensions’ a state - Basierende Regulations created. ”
Throughout its history, insurance to avoid “tension” when they try to minimize government interference in their affairs. In 1945 the industry supports the McCarran-Ferguson Act, the reaction to a Supreme Court decision affirming the role of regulation in the United States. In recent years, the industry has asked the Confederation opportunity to strengthen surveillance on the assumption that it would be less burdensome. I will let the legal researchers decide whether the state or federal system is inherently more appropriate. The question is whether an industry not known treatment for the generosity of its customers (the victims of Katrina Think of refused coverage), under the strict control of somewhere.