The NAIC is using company money to hire a lobbyist in Washington to oppose the type of uniformity in regulation that only a Federal regulator can create. Baker and Oxley should refuse to meet with any NAIC hired gun, as this is just plain improper conduct — lobbying by the regulators just to keep their powers.
Have you ever heard of a “federal consumer”? It just could be that state regulators are interested in protecting the consumers in their states because the track record of federal regulation is strewn with some of the most costly bailouts and debacles ever witnessed (S & L scandal, Enrons, mutual funds. It took a maverick NY AG to show us how weak and cozy federal regulation is. States certainly need to become more uniform, perhaps with some push from the feds, but moving to federal regulation is just like throwing the rabbit into the briar patch.
The NAIC is using company money to hire a lobbyist in Washington to oppose the type of uniformity in regulation that only a Federal regulator can create. Baker and Oxley should refuse to meet with any NAIC hired gun, as this is just plain improper conduct — lobbying by the regulators just to keep their powers.
And how is that different than insurers taking policyholder money and hiring lobbyist to push anti-consumer initiatives?
Have you ever heard of a “federal consumer”? It just could be that state regulators are interested in protecting the consumers in their states because the track record of federal regulation is strewn with some of the most costly bailouts and debacles ever witnessed (S & L scandal, Enrons, mutual funds. It took a maverick NY AG to show us how weak and cozy federal regulation is. States certainly need to become more uniform, perhaps with some push from the feds, but moving to federal regulation is just like throwing the rabbit into the briar patch.