Treasury Says More Time Needed to Complete FIO’s Modernization Report

By | February 2, 2012

  • February 2, 2012 at 2:30 pm
    Agent says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    We, as agents will really appreciate Turbo Tax Tim in charge of regulation of the Insurance Industry. Just what we need, more bureaucracy to deal with. What good are the states now? Are they going to get their marching orders from DC now?

  • February 2, 2012 at 2:52 pm
    The Other Point of View says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Why not wait until you hear what the report has to say before drawing conclusions about what’s in the report?

    The recommendations are being made after receiving input from state insurance commissioners and the insurance industry itself. In other words, the report is supposed to recommend (key word is recommendd, not regulate) ways to improve state regulation of insurance and is based on things that the people being regulated think needs fixing.

  • February 2, 2012 at 3:16 pm
    Agent says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Excuse me TOPOV for raining on the Federal Government’s parade. We all know what a wonderful job they do regulating other industries and poking their nose into the private market. The States are perfectly capable of regulating companies and agents, handling licensing issues, fraud and abuse etc. We don’t need any more federal bureaucrats adding to our burden.

    • February 2, 2012 at 4:03 pm
      The Other Point of View says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 0
      Thumb down 0

      If you can’t understand the agency’s mission, you can’t form a reasonably intelligent opinion. FIO is not a regulatory agency.

      I think we ought to have two types of airlines. Those that are regulated by federal safety inspectors and those that are not. Let’s see which airline you fly.

      I’m so sick of hearing about how awful our government is.

      You think the government can’t do anything right? Try sending a letter by Fedex or UPS for 44 cents. See how far that gets you.

      You are breathing clean air and drinking water free from arsenic because of government regulations.

      • February 2, 2012 at 4:47 pm
        Agent says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 0
        Thumb down 0

        Actually, the snail mail went to .45 and they expect to soon stop Saturday delivery because they are running huge deficits each and every year. How is that for government efficiency? If the government was doing their job and we were electing responsible people to office, we wouldn’t be running trillion dollar deficits each year. How come we don’t have any movement to identify waste, streamline, eliminate departments, agencies that do duplicative work, programs that do not work? Everything they do is to regulate, control every aspect of our lives and at a much higher cost. Our air and water are cleaner than they were 20 years ago and yet EPA wants to close down 100 coal plants which will cost jobs and make our energy costs skyrocket. It is too bad, TOPOV that you don’t see what is happening to this country.

        • February 2, 2012 at 5:03 pm
          The Other Point of View says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 0
          Thumb down 0

          OK, 45 cents. Let’s double it. No let’s multiply it by 20. Try to get UPS or Fedex to ship a letter for $9.00.

          We have a huge deficit for two reasons. (1) Unemployment is up, so less workers are paying taxes. (2) We cut taxes (taxes are how the givernment gets its income). So, fewer workers are paying taxes and those that do pay are paying less taxes. And your solution is to….wait for it…here it comes….cut taxes even more! Yeah, that makes a lot of sense if you are living in an alternate universe.

          “Cut government waste, fraud and abuse’ is a slogan that fits on a bumper sticker.

          You complain that government regulates every aspect of your life. I find that shocking. I can’t think of a single regulation that I find myself having to comply with on a daily basis. I suppose I don’t like having to take off my shoes when I go through the screener at the airport. Other than that, there’ snot much government involvement in my life. (Other than the behind the scenes things like making sure my plane is inspcted, my food is free of rat shit, and my air isn’t filled with toxins spewed from coal plants.)

          Glad to see you admit your air and water are cleaner now. Thank the EPA for that, or thank Richard Nixon for starting the agency.

          • February 3, 2012 at 7:45 am
            Former Status Quo says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 0

            Just want to point out that we are running huge deficits for a third reason, we keep extending the unemployment benefits thereby increasing the welfare society. While I agree with both of your arguments, it should be noted that the government is very inefficient and should not get involved in a system that is not broken.

            Last time I checked, ACE, Chubb, Travelers, Allstate, State Farm, etc did not cause the financial crisis. So why did they create a new bureau to regulate/monitor these companies? From a carrier standpoint, it would be great if you could stream line all of the laws and regulations around claims, finance, and rates/rules/forms; however, the states are given the power to govern themselves and that’s what they do. If you don’t like it, then a) move out of the country or b) try ratifying the Constitution…

          • February 3, 2012 at 8:42 am
            The Other Point of View says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 0

            You say the government is inefficient, but I think you’re wrong and my example of mail delivery for 45 cents is a perfect example. It’s easy to say “government is inefficient” and as I’ve said many times, it makes a nice bumper sticker/talking point but what is the basis of your statement? I think our government does a great job providing services to our citizens. You think it’s so bad? Have you ever visited other countries? We have it so good here!

            They did not create FIO to regulate big insurance companies. It was created to monitor and provide recommendations for improving STATE regulation. And they big insurance companies are involved because we do not want another “too big to fail” situation that will require a taxpayer bailout. It’s to prevernt another AIG fiasco. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

            And please, why do people on the Right always say “if you don;t like it, you can leave.”? What kind of unAmerican crap is that? I could turn it around and say “If you don’t like the regulations, you leave.” But I wont because it’s childish.

            By the way, the Constitution was ratified in 1789. I think you meant amend. And I would tell you that if you don’t like regulations and new beuaracracies designed to protect citizens, then you should amend the Constitution. FIO is not unconstitutional. If you dont like it, start a movement to make it unconstitutional.

            Regulation of insurance by the states is not a Constitutional issue. It’s there because of the McCarren-Ferguson Act, a legislative act.

          • February 3, 2012 at 3:44 pm
            Agent says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 0

            TOPOV, cite me one case where increasing taxes on people have spurred the economy and increased revenue. All the revenue increases this country has had resulted in lowering taxes which spurred economic growth and created jobs and more taxpayers. All one has to do is look at the Reagan revolution which lowered taxer and we enjoyed a 6% growth rate after the malaise of Carter where we were stuck at 1-2% growth,an energy crisis, high inflation, high taxes, no job growth which was commonly known as stagflation. This is the result of Progressive policies which had been going on for decades. You may think this kind of governance is good, but the majority of us don’t.

      • February 2, 2012 at 5:33 pm
        DBP says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 0
        Thumb down 0

        .45

  • February 2, 2012 at 3:54 pm
    Swede700 says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Considering that I work in state regulation, I tend to agree with TOPOV on this issue. At this point, the FIO has no jurisdiction to regulate insurance. Their only duties at this point are to collect data provided to it by the states and the NAIC, as well as assist on insurance issues in international treaties.

    And especially with such divisiveness up on Capitol Hill, don’t expect them to get any more power for many years, since they have no experience or knowledge of the industry.

  • February 3, 2012 at 9:57 am
    To TOPOV says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    While I respect your point of view, I do want to point out a couple of things…

    The 45 cent USPS rate that you keep touting is not sufficient to pay their bills. This proven by the fact that USPS is running HUGE deficits. I don’t think that deserves a pat on the back. Private entities do not have the luxury of taxpayer backing so they have to charge higher rates or go out of business.

    Examples of governmental insurance failures such as the NFIP and Medicare cause uneasiness in the private market.

    The National Flood Insurance Program is in the hole. Rate subsidization has greatly contributed to NFIP’s financial woes. The government would rather provide cheap insurance through rate subsidies from taxpayers than charge rates commensurate with the risk. If one cannot afford the actual cost of NFIP insurance, then he should move inland rather than expect taxpayers to help pick up the tab. A private insurer in the same financial position as NFIP would be taken over by regulators and liquidated due to insolvency. I don’t think the government deserves a pat on the back for NFIP. The program should be required to stand on its own fiancial footing like insurers in the private market rather than depending on taxpayers as a backstop. A $16-$18 billion forgiveness from taxpayers? Come on!

    Medicare reimbursement rates are below market rates, thus helping increase the cost of health insurance for the private market. Medicare pays less per dollar of service than the private industry. This forces doctors to cover their costs through higher billing of private insurers. I have a doctor in the family that sees this firsthand. The government has done little tort reform, which would go a long way in combating jackpot lawsuits in our litigous society. Private health insurance premiums are on track to get worse as retirees begin flooding the Medicare program.

    You are right that the FOI does not have regulating power. I’d like to add “yet” to that, which is the fear in the industry. The possibility of dual regulation means the possibility of more costs. Costs that will get passed on to the insurance-buying public. Insurance does not have the systematic risks inherent in the rest of the financial sector thanks to already-effective state regulation. That’s why the FIO seems to be a waste of time and money. Hopefully, they will not receive regulatory powers or the cost of insurance will need to increase.

    The government is not perfect and never will be. They have gotten many things right too. I just tend to disagree with throwing money at a problem that doesn’t exist.

    • February 3, 2012 at 2:51 pm
      Agent says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 0
      Thumb down 0

      I couldn’t have said it better. You won’t make a dent in TOPOV’s Progressive brain which thinks our government is so great and efficient while controlling and regulating the private sector. Just about everything they touch and regulate is wasteful if not totally corrupt or kills jobs. Is it any wonder we are running trillion dollar deficits? Think about it. The Federal Government collects $2.4 Trillion with a T and they manage to spend a trillion more than what they take in to fund this bloated bureaucracy. If we, as businessmen ran our business that way, we couldn’t get banks to loan us money to stay in business. They would say our business model is a prescription for disaster and send us on our way. Our government just keeps on borrowing from the taxpayers and raising our taxes and doing the same thing over and over hoping for a different result. Those that don’t learn from history are doomed to repeat it. I don’t like living is a perpetual recession, do you? We have had enough of Progressives thinking they can spend their way to prosperity by bankrupting the country.

    • February 8, 2012 at 2:11 pm
      Just another thought says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 0
      Thumb down 0

      Quit blaming USPS for their financial woes. They didn’t get into such a horrible position until our Congress forced them there. I remember reading and found the following:

      “The USPS carries an extraordinary financial burden that no other government agency or company bears.

      A 2006 law, the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act, requires the Postal Service to pre-fund the health care benefits of future retirees. It forces the agency to pre-fund a 75-year liability in just 10 years, which costs the USPS more than $5.5 billion annually.

      This mandate is the reason the Postal Service is threatening to end Saturday mail delivery service, lay off 120,000 workers, close thousands of post offices and eliminate hundreds of mail processing facilities.

      In addition, the Postal Service is required to overpay billions more into its pension accounts in the Civil Service Retirement System and the Federal Employees Retirement System.”



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*