Why doesn’t this “large US consumer group” advocate the reinstatement of Glass-Steagall itself instead of legislation similar to G-S applied to the insurance sector? Perhaps if we hadn’t repealed G-S we wouldn’t be in this mess in the first place.
Nice idea on the “non insurance risks” but how about the risky behavior for their core insurance risks – such as poor pricing, accumulation of limits, or just general poor management.
Couldn’t agree more. What about all those nimrod carriers out there who are slashing already insufficient pricing and increasing limits on top of it????
NO matter how much the insurance industry lobbies, politicians do not listen, without a contribution to the campaign, I guess. They keep carrying on about stopping INSURANCE companies from risky transactions, even though credit default swaps were not and are not intended to be INSURANCE. Derivatives are investment vehicles and insurance companies are not in the investment business: how hard is that to understand. yet these politicians want to be seen as doing something positive and hitting on INSURANCE companies is easier than going after those who found ways around the SEC, FDIC and Thrift supervision. And in the long run, they will Firetruck the insurance sector(strike through) just as they did mortgage lending, stocks, oil futures and commodities. They won’t fix anything, not for nothing anyway; when the money flows, then we’ll see some action but this effort to fix INSURANCE practices is laughable, but because it is serious, it is actually a tragedy. Congress is truly the opposite of Progress!
the insurance industry has several mechanisms to protect consumers, Guaranty funds for example. As for poor pricing or management, companies like that don’t stay afloat long. the insurance industry does not perform as well as the Fortune 500 but their business model is cannot compare to banking and investment managment. they do not post those high quarterly yields but instead are just mildly profitable; at the same time, insurance is not driving this recession. It is the capitalistic drive for higher profits at all costs that did in the economy: someone got all that money that went into the pipeline and it ain’t INSURANCE companies….
Again, those carriers keep the market soft but they are NOT taking the economy with them! Let’s compare apples to apples; people don’t understand INSURANCE, and your comments demonstrate that; in fact, soft pricing actually FAVORS the consumer, doesn’t it?
Travis Plunkett says: “avoid systemic risk by limiting the size of the insurer”. This guy sounds like an idiot. This is the USA! We don’t shoot for mediocre, we shoot for the best!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Right, let’s just keep our sights down a little lower now guys. Stop trying to sell so damn many products would ya???????
Where are these freaks coming from? They have literally flowed from the deepest bowels of the earth this year, pushing their way up to the daylight. Squash them please!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
$3 trillion
:
by Richard M. Ebeling
Wednesday, 06 August 2008
With the government budgeted to spend nearly $3 trillion in its current 2008 fiscal year, it should not be surprising that special interest groups of all types flock to Washington, D.C., to lobby for pieces of the budget pie at taxpayers’ expense.
In 2007, over 15,600 registered lobbyists spent more than $2.8 billion to influence federal legislation and tax policy. During the last ten years the number of D.C. lobbyists has increased by one-third, while their spending has almost doubled.
Lobbyists span the political spectrum and represent virtually every sector of the economy and social group. Special interest groups lobby for offensive and defensive reasons. Some pressure groups aggressively lobby to acquire benefits, favors, and government handouts to the detriment of their competitors’ and the taxpayers. Others lobby reactively to prevent the implementation of government regulations and redistributions that might harm them.
But either way, billions are are being spent each year to persuade politicians to use their governmental power in one way or another that otherwise could have been spent more productively in private sector activities.
According to the Center for Responsive Politics, in 2007, organized labor spent over $44.3 million on lobbying members of Congress. Public sector unions shelled out almost $18.5 million last year to influence federal legislation; transportation unions spent nearly $10.6 million, industrial unions spent $6.1 million, and other unions spent in total another $6 million.
On the other hand, business associations of all types spent more than $87.2 million last year on lobbying activities (the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, alone, expended over $52.7 million of this total).
As can be seen in the Table A, below, by industry, pharmaceutical and health product companies spent the most on lobbying in 2007, almost $227 million , followed by insurance ($135.9 million), computers/internet ($110.7 million), electric utilities ($110.6 million), hospital/nursing homes ($91.5 million), and education ($88 million).
In Table B, below, the specific largest individual associations and companies are listed that expended the largest sums on hiring Washington lobbyists in 2007.
Freddie Mac spent $8.5 million and Fannie Mae $5.6 million “persuading” the congressmen who have now assured them a government-guaranteed bailout.
Finally, Table C, below, summarizes the leading policy issues in terms of the number of clients (businesses, unions, associations, non-profits) that hired lobbyists to influence federal legislation in their respective desired directions.
Not surprisingly, the general heading of federal budget and appropriation issues had the largest number of interested parties hiring lobbying firms. After all, this covers a huge number of policy areas for which government can expend monies, impose regulations, or distribute any number of other favors and privileges that can affect the economic well-being of virtually any citizen in the United States.
The specific spending areas that drew the biggest number of clients in 2007, outside of general budget and appropriation decisions, were, respectively, defense, health care issues, taxes, transportation, and energy.
Billions of dollars a year in lobbying activities will continue to be spent in Washington as long as the government has favors and privileges to bestow, and other people’s money to redistribute for the benefit of some at the general taxpayers’ and citizens’ expense
Why doesn’t this “large US consumer group” advocate the reinstatement of Glass-Steagall itself instead of legislation similar to G-S applied to the insurance sector? Perhaps if we hadn’t repealed G-S we wouldn’t be in this mess in the first place.
Nice idea on the “non insurance risks” but how about the risky behavior for their core insurance risks – such as poor pricing, accumulation of limits, or just general poor management.
Couldn’t agree more. What about all those nimrod carriers out there who are slashing already insufficient pricing and increasing limits on top of it????
NO matter how much the insurance industry lobbies, politicians do not listen, without a contribution to the campaign, I guess. They keep carrying on about stopping INSURANCE companies from risky transactions, even though credit default swaps were not and are not intended to be INSURANCE. Derivatives are investment vehicles and insurance companies are not in the investment business: how hard is that to understand. yet these politicians want to be seen as doing something positive and hitting on INSURANCE companies is easier than going after those who found ways around the SEC, FDIC and Thrift supervision. And in the long run, they will Firetruck the insurance sector(strike through) just as they did mortgage lending, stocks, oil futures and commodities. They won’t fix anything, not for nothing anyway; when the money flows, then we’ll see some action but this effort to fix INSURANCE practices is laughable, but because it is serious, it is actually a tragedy. Congress is truly the opposite of Progress!
the insurance industry has several mechanisms to protect consumers, Guaranty funds for example. As for poor pricing or management, companies like that don’t stay afloat long. the insurance industry does not perform as well as the Fortune 500 but their business model is cannot compare to banking and investment managment. they do not post those high quarterly yields but instead are just mildly profitable; at the same time, insurance is not driving this recession. It is the capitalistic drive for higher profits at all costs that did in the economy: someone got all that money that went into the pipeline and it ain’t INSURANCE companies….
Again, those carriers keep the market soft but they are NOT taking the economy with them! Let’s compare apples to apples; people don’t understand INSURANCE, and your comments demonstrate that; in fact, soft pricing actually FAVORS the consumer, doesn’t it?
Travis Plunkett says: “avoid systemic risk by limiting the size of the insurer”. This guy sounds like an idiot. This is the USA! We don’t shoot for mediocre, we shoot for the best!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Right, let’s just keep our sights down a little lower now guys. Stop trying to sell so damn many products would ya???????
Where are these freaks coming from? They have literally flowed from the deepest bowels of the earth this year, pushing their way up to the daylight. Squash them please!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
$3 trillion
:
by Richard M. Ebeling
Wednesday, 06 August 2008
With the government budgeted to spend nearly $3 trillion in its current 2008 fiscal year, it should not be surprising that special interest groups of all types flock to Washington, D.C., to lobby for pieces of the budget pie at taxpayers’ expense.
In 2007, over 15,600 registered lobbyists spent more than $2.8 billion to influence federal legislation and tax policy. During the last ten years the number of D.C. lobbyists has increased by one-third, while their spending has almost doubled.
Lobbyists span the political spectrum and represent virtually every sector of the economy and social group. Special interest groups lobby for offensive and defensive reasons. Some pressure groups aggressively lobby to acquire benefits, favors, and government handouts to the detriment of their competitors’ and the taxpayers. Others lobby reactively to prevent the implementation of government regulations and redistributions that might harm them.
But either way, billions are are being spent each year to persuade politicians to use their governmental power in one way or another that otherwise could have been spent more productively in private sector activities.
According to the Center for Responsive Politics, in 2007, organized labor spent over $44.3 million on lobbying members of Congress. Public sector unions shelled out almost $18.5 million last year to influence federal legislation; transportation unions spent nearly $10.6 million, industrial unions spent $6.1 million, and other unions spent in total another $6 million.
On the other hand, business associations of all types spent more than $87.2 million last year on lobbying activities (the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, alone, expended over $52.7 million of this total).
As can be seen in the Table A, below, by industry, pharmaceutical and health product companies spent the most on lobbying in 2007, almost $227 million , followed by insurance ($135.9 million), computers/internet ($110.7 million), electric utilities ($110.6 million), hospital/nursing homes ($91.5 million), and education ($88 million).
In Table B, below, the specific largest individual associations and companies are listed that expended the largest sums on hiring Washington lobbyists in 2007.
Freddie Mac spent $8.5 million and Fannie Mae $5.6 million “persuading” the congressmen who have now assured them a government-guaranteed bailout.
Finally, Table C, below, summarizes the leading policy issues in terms of the number of clients (businesses, unions, associations, non-profits) that hired lobbyists to influence federal legislation in their respective desired directions.
Not surprisingly, the general heading of federal budget and appropriation issues had the largest number of interested parties hiring lobbying firms. After all, this covers a huge number of policy areas for which government can expend monies, impose regulations, or distribute any number of other favors and privileges that can affect the economic well-being of virtually any citizen in the United States.
The specific spending areas that drew the biggest number of clients in 2007, outside of general budget and appropriation decisions, were, respectively, defense, health care issues, taxes, transportation, and energy.
Billions of dollars a year in lobbying activities will continue to be spent in Washington as long as the government has favors and privileges to bestow, and other people’s money to redistribute for the benefit of some at the general taxpayers’ and citizens’ expense
That might actually be one reform WE NEED.